1
Dupăce a isprăvit Isus toate cuvântările acestea, a zis ucenicilor Săi:
2
,,Ştiţi că după două zile vor fi Paştele; şi Fiul omului va fi dat ca să fie răstignit!``
3
Atunci preoţii cei mai de seamă, cărturarii şi bătrânii norodului s-au strâns în curtea marelui preot care se numea Caiafa;
4
şi s-au sfătuit împreună, cum să prindă pe Isus cu vicleşug, şi să -L omoare.
5
Dar ziceau: ,,Nu în timpul praznicului, ca să nu se facă turburare în norod.``
6
Când era Isus în Betania, în casa lui Simon leprosul,
7
s-a apropiat de El o femeie cu un vas de alabastru cu mir foarte scump; şi, pe când sta El la masă, ea a turnat mirul pe capul Lui.
8
Ucenicilor le-a fost necaz, când au văzut lucrul acesta, şi au zis: ,,Ce rost are risipa aceasta?
9
Mirul acesta s-ar fi putut vinde foarte scump, şi banii să se dea săracilor.``
10
Când a auzit Isus, le-a zis: ,,De ce faceţi supărare femeii? Ea a făcut un lucru frumos faţă de Mine.
11
Pentrucă pe săraci îi aveţi totdeauna cu voi, dar pe Mine nu Mă aveţi totdeauna.
12
Dacă a turnat acest mir pe trupul Meu, ea a făcut lucrul acesta în vederea pregătirii Mele pentru îngropare.
13
Adevărat vă spun că ori unde va fi propovăduită Evanghelia aceasta, în toată lumea, se va spune şi ce a făcut femeia aceasta, spre pomenirea ei.``
14
Atunci unul din cei doisprezece, numit Iuda Iscarioteanul, s-a dus la preoţii cei mai de seamă,
15
şi le-a zis: ,,Ce vreţi să-mi daţi, şi -L voi da în mânile voastre?`` Ei i-au cântărit treizeci de arginţi.
16
Din clipa aceea, Iuda căuta un prilej nimerit, ca să dea pe Isus în mânile lor.
17
În ziua dintâi a praznicului Azimilor, ucenicii au venit la Isus, şi I-au zis: ,,Unde vrei să-Ţi pregătim să mănânci Paştele?``
18
El le-a răspuns: ,,Duceţi-vă în cetate la cutare om, şi spuneţi-i: ,,Învăţătorul zice: ,Vremea Mea este aproape; voi face Paştele cu ucenicii Mei în casa ta.``
19
Ucenicii au făcut cum le poruncise Isus, şi au pregătit Paştele.
20
Seara, Isus a şezut la masă cu cei doisprezece ucenici ai Săi.
21
Pe când mâncau, El a zis: ,,Adevărat vă spun că unul din voi Mă va vinde.``
22
Ei s-au întristat foarte mult, şi au început să -I zică unul după altul: ,,Nu cumva sânt eu, Doamne?``
23
Drept răspuns, El le-a zis: ,,Cel ce a întins cu Mine mâna în blid, acela Mă va vinde.
24
Negreşit, Fiul omului Se duce după cum este scris despre El. Dar vai de omul acela prin care este vândut Fiul omului! Mai bine ar fi fost pentru el să nu se fi născut!``
25
Iuda, vânzătorul, a luat cuvântul, şi I-a zis: ,,Nu cumva sânt eu, Învăţătorule?`` ,,Da``, i-a răspuns Isus, ,,tu eşti!``
26
Pe când mâncau ei, Isus a luat o pâne; şi după ce a binecuvântat, a frânt-o, şi a dat-o ucenicilor, zicând: ,,Luaţi, mâncaţi; acesta este trupul Meu.``
27
Apoi a luat un pahar, şi, după ce a mulţămit lui Dumnezeu, li l-a dat, zicând: ,,Beţi toţi din el;
28
căci acesta este sângele Meu, sângele legământului celui nou, care se varsă pentru mulţi, spre iertarea păcatelor.
29
Vă spun că, de acum încolo nu voi mai bea din acest rod al viţei, până în ziua când îl voi bea cu voi nou în Împărăţia Tatălui Meu.``
30
După ce au cântat cântarea, au ieşit în muntele Măslinilor.
31
Atunci Isus le-a zis: ,,În noaptea aceasta, toţi veţi găsi în Mine o pricină de poticnire; căci este scris: ,Voi bate Păstorul, şi oile turmei vor fi risipite.`
32
Dar, după ce voi învia, voi merge înaintea voastră în Galilea.``
33
Petru a luat cuvântul, şi I-a zis: ,,Chiar dacă toţi ar găsi în Tine o pricină de poticnire, eu niciodată nu voi găsi în Tine o pricină de poticnire.``
34
,,Adevărat îţi spun``, i-a zis Isus, ,,că tu, chiar în noaptea aceasta, înainte ca să cânte cocoşul, te vei lepăda de Mine de trei ori.``
35
Petru I-a răspuns: ,,Chiar dacă ar trebui să mor cu Tine, tot nu mă voi lepăda de Tine.`` Şi toţi ucenicii au spus acelaş lucru.
36
Atunci Isus a venit cu ei într-un loc îngrădit, numit Ghetsimani, şi a zis ucenicilor: ,,Şedeţi aici până Mă voi duce colo să Mă rog.``
37
A luat cu El pe Petru şi pe cei doi fii ai lui Zebedei, şi a început să Se întristeze şi să se mâhnească foarte tare.
38
Isus le-a zis atunci: ,,Sufletul Meu este cuprins de o întristare de moarte; rămâneţi aici, şi vegheaţi împreună cu Mine.``
39
Apoi a mers puţin mai înainte, a căzut cu faţa la pământ, şi S-a rugat, zicând: ,,Tată, dacă este cu putinţă, depărtează dela Mine paharul acesta! Totuş nu cum voiesc Eu, ci cum voieşti Tu.``
40
Apoi a venit la ucenici, i-a găsit dormind, şi a zis lui Petru: ,,Ce, un ceas n-aţi putut să vegheaţi împreună cu Mine!
41
Vegheaţi şi rugaţi-vă, ca să nu cădeţi în ispită; duhul, în adevăr, este plin de râvnă, dar carnea este neputincioasă.``
42
S-a depărtat a doua oară, şi S-a rugat, zicând: ,,Tată, dacă nu se poate să se îndepărteze de Mine paharul acesta, fără să-l beau, facă-se voia Ta!``
43
S-a întors iarăş la ucenici, şi i-a găsit dormind; pentrucă li se îngreuiaseră ochii de somn.
44
I-a lăsat din nou, S-a depărtat, şi S-a rugat a treia oară, zicând aceleaşi cuvinte.
45
Apoi a venit la ucenici, şi le-a zis: ,,Dormiţi de acum şi odihniţi-vă!.. Iată că a venit ceasul ca Fiul omului să fie dat în mânile păcătoşilor.
46
Sculaţi-vă, haidem să mergem; iată că se apropie vânzătorul.``
47
Pe când vorbea El încă, iată că vine Iuda, unul din cei doisprezece, cu o gloată mare, cu săbii şi cu ciomege, trimeşi de preoţii cei mai de seamă şi de bătrânii norodului.``
48
Vânzătorul le dăduse semnul acesta: ,,Pe care-l voi săruta eu, acela este; să puneţi mâna pe el!``
49
Îndată, Iuda s-a apropiat de Isus, şi I-a zis: ,,Plecăciune, Învăţătorule!`` Şi L-a sărutat.
50
Isus i-a zis: ,,Prietene, ce ai venit să faci, fă!`` Atunci oamenii aceia s-au apropiat, au pus mânile pe Isus, şi L-au prins.
51
Şi unul din ceice erau cu Isus, a întins mâna, a scos sabia, a lovit pe robul marelui preot, şi i-a tăiat urechea.
52
Atunci Isus i-a zis: ,,Pune-ţi sabia la locul ei; căci toţi ceice scot sabia, de sabie vor pieri.
53
Crezi că n-aş putea să rog pe Tatăl Meu, care Mi-ar pune îndată la îndemână mai mult de douăsprezece legiuni de îngeri?
54
Dar cum se vor împlini Scripturile, cari zic că aşa trebuie să se întâmple?``
55
În clipa aceea, Isus a zis gloatelor: ,,Aţi ieşit ca după un tâlhar, cu săbii şi cu ciomege, ca să Mă prindeţi. În toate zilele şedeam în mijlocul vostru, şi învăţam norodul în Templu, şi n-aţi pus mâna pe Mine.
56
Dar toate aceste lucruri s-au întâmplat ca să se împlinească cele scrise prin prooroci.`` Atunci toţi ucenicii L-au părăsit şi au fugit.
57
Ceice au prins pe Isus, L-au dus la marele preot Caiafa, unde erau adunaţi cărturarii şi bătrânii.
58
Petru L-a urmat de departe, până la curtea marelui preot; apoi a intrat înlăuntru, şi a şezut jos cu aprozii, ca să vadă sfârşitul.
59
Preoţii cei mai de seamă, bătrânii şi tot Soborul căutau vre-o mărturie mincinoasă împotriva lui Isus, ca să -L poată omorî.
60
Dar n-au găsit niciuna, măcar că s-au înfăţişat mulţi martori mincinoşi. La urmă au venit doi,
61
şi au spus: Acesta a zis: ,,Eu pot să stric Templul lui Dumnezeu şi să-l zidesc iarăş în trei zile.``
62
Marele preot s-a sculat în picioare, şi I-a zis: ,,Nu răspunzi nimic? Ce mărturisesc aceştia împotriva Ta?``
63
Isus tăcea. Şi marele preot a luat cuvântul şi I-a zis: ,,Te jur, pe Dumnezeul cel viu, să ne spui dacă eşti Hristosul, Fiul lui Dumnezeu.``
64
,,Da``, i-a răspuns Isus, ,,sânt! ,,Ba mai mult, vă spun că de acum încolo veţi vedea pe Fiul omului şezând la dreapta puterii lui Dumnezeu, şi venind pe norii cerului.``
65
Atunci marele preot şi-a rupt hainele, şi a zis: ,,A hulit! Ce nevoie mai avem de martori? Iată că acum aţi auzit hula Lui.
66
Ce credeţi?`` Ei au răspuns: ,,Este vinovat să fie pedepsit cu moartea.``
67
Atunci L-au scuipat în faţă, L-au bătut cu pumnii, şi L-au pălmuit,
69
Petru însă şedea afară în curte. O slujnică a venit la el, şi i-a zis: ,,Şi tu erai cu Isus Galileanul!``
70
Dar el s-a lepădat înaintea tuturor, şi i-a zis: ,,Nu ştiu ce vrei să zici.``
71
Când a ieşit în pridvor, l-a văzut o altă slujnică, şi a zis celor de acolo: ,,Şi acesta era cu Isus din Nazaret.``
72
El s-a lepădat iarăş, cu un jurământ, şi a zis: ,,Nu cunosc pe omul acesta!``
73
Peste puţin, cei ce stăteau acolo, s-au apropiat, şi au zis lui Petru: ,,Nu mai încape îndoială că şi tu eşti unul din oamenii aceia, căci şi vorba te dă de gol.``
74
Atunci el a început să se blastăme şi să se jure, zicând: ,,Nu cunosc pe omul acesta!`` În clipa aceea a cântat cocoşul.
75
Şi Petru şi-a adus aminte de vorba, pe care i-o spusese Isus: ,,Înainte ca să cânte cocoşul, te vei lepăda de Mine de trei ori.`` Şi a ieşit afară şi a plâns cu amar.
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":24831,"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":28934,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40212,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage","title_en":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage","content_ro":"<h3>The Bloody-Sweat Passage<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols), including 0171 (dated around 300) or crossing out the passage (as was done by the first corrector of Codex Sinaiticus). Writing in the fourth century, Epiphanius (Ancoratus 31.4-5) indicated that the verses were found in some “uncorrected copies” ofLuke. But other early church fathers (Justin, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Dionysius, Eusebius) acknowledged this portion as part of Luke’s Gospel.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The debate about the genuiness of this passage has focused on what view one takes concerning whether or not Jesus needed to have been strengthened by angels during his trial in the Garden of Gethsemane. Some have said that the passage was excised because certain Christians thought that the account of Jesus overwhelmed with human weakness was incompatible with his deity. But it is more likely that the passage was an early (second century) interpolation, added from an oral tradition concerning the life of Jesus. Its transposition to Matthew 26 in some manuscripts and lectionaries indicates that it was a free-floating passage that could be interjected into any of the Passion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the textual evidence against the passage, most English versions have kept it in the text for the sake of tradition. Therefore, many Christians consider this detail about Jesus’ Passion to be authentic. However, it is often interpreted incorrectly to say that Jesus was in such agony that he was sweating blood (technically called hemohydrosis or hematidrosis); that is why the passage is often called “the bloody-sweat” text. But the text says that he was sweating so profusely that it looked like blood dripping from a wound, not that his sweat became dripping blood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bloody-Sweat Passage<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols), including 0171 (dated around 300) or crossing out the passage (as was done by the first corrector of Codex Sinaiticus). Writing in the fourth century, Epiphanius (Ancoratus 31.4-5) indicated that the verses were found in some “uncorrected copies” ofLuke. But other early church fathers (Justin, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Dionysius, Eusebius) acknowledged this portion as part of Luke’s Gospel.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The debate about the genuiness of this passage has focused on what view one takes concerning whether or not Jesus needed to have been strengthened by angels during his trial in the Garden of Gethsemane. Some have said that the passage was excised because certain Christians thought that the account of Jesus overwhelmed with human weakness was incompatible with his deity. But it is more likely that the passage was an early (second century) interpolation, added from an oral tradition concerning the life of Jesus. Its transposition to Matthew 26 in some manuscripts and lectionaries indicates that it was a free-floating passage that could be interjected into any of the Passion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the textual evidence against the passage, most English versions have kept it in the text for the sake of tradition. Therefore, many Christians consider this detail about Jesus’ Passion to be authentic. However, it is often interpreted incorrectly to say that Jesus was in such agony that he was sweating blood (technically called hemohydrosis or hematidrosis); that is why the passage is often called “the bloody-sweat” text. But the text says that he was sweating so profusely that it looked like blood dripping from a wound, not that his sweat became dripping blood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols)...","summary_en":"The Bloody-Sweat Passage This is the name for Luke 22:43-44, which speaks of Jesus sweating, as it were, drops of blood. But the genuiness of this passage is doubted—at least, as to Lucan authorship. Several important manuscripts do not include the passage: P69, P75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Borgianus, and Codex Washingtonianus—manuscripts dating from the second to the fifth century. Other signs of its doubtfulness appear in manuscripts marking the passage with obeli (symbols)...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":55035,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","summary_en":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82661,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","summary_en":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110287,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","summary_en":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137913,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:2<\/strong> The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","summary_en":"26:2 The irony is that the Son of Man, who is to judge the nations (25:31-46), must first be wrongly judged and condemned to death by evil people. Jesus’ death was the ultimate Passover sacrifice (see John 19:31-37; 1 Cor 5:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64963,"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":65152,"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":66102,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92589,"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":92778,"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":93728,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120215,"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":120404,"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":121354,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147841,"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":148030,"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":148980,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":42530,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70156,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97782,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125408,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5923,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Caiaphas","title_en":"Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","summary_en":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10306,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elder","title_en":"Elder","content_ro":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","summary_en":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33897,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sanhedrin*","title_en":"Sanhedrin*","content_ro":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","summary_en":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39682,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","title_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","content_ro":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","summary_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55036,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","summary_en":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82662,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","summary_en":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110288,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","summary_en":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137914,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:3<\/strong> <em>The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest<\/em><em>,<\/em> was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was <em>ad hoc<\/em>, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36 (John 11:49), the longest tenure of any high priest from the time of Herod’s rule until <span>AD<\/span> 70. His father-in-law, Annas, had been deposed but continued to be called high priest as well (see Luke 3:2; John 18:13, 19-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","summary_en":"26:3 The residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, was near the Temple in Jerusalem’s Upper City. Since it was not the normal meeting place, this gathering was ad hoc, urgent, and probably secretive. The council chamber, the traditional meeting place for the Sanhedrin, was located either at the southern end of the Court of the Israelites in the Temple, or on the western edge of the Temple hill. • Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (see John 18:13), was high priest from AD 18 to 36 (John 11:49...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":55037,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","summary_en":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82663,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","summary_en":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110289,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","summary_en":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137915,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:5<\/strong> Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at <em>Passover<\/em><em>,<\/em> and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","summary_en":"26:5 Jerusalem was flooded with pilgrims at Passover, and the Jewish leaders worried about having their authority taken away if they caused or allowed anything that resembled revolt against Rome (see 21:8-11, 14-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":42238,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42382,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69864,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70008,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97490,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97634,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125116,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Women Named Mary","title_en":"Women Named Mary","content_ro":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Women Named Mary<\/h3>\n<p>Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunday morning with burial spices. She was among the first to be told of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11, 22-24), and she was the first to see the resurrected Jesus (Matt 28:9-10; Mark 16:9-11; John 20:1-2, 11-18).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Mary the mother of James the younger (not the same person as James the apostle) and Joseph was also among the women who were present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; cp. Luke 23:49, 55). Like Mary Magdalene, she was among the first who heard the news of his resurrection (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11), and she was one of the first to see the risen Jesus (Matt 28:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>(3) Mary of Bethany was the sister of Martha and Lazarus; their family was much loved by Jesus (John 11:5). Jesus commended Mary for her eagerness to learn from him (Luke 10:38-42). Soon after Jesus had raised her brother from the dead (John 11:32-45), Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with very expensive perfume, an act defended by Jesus when others criticized it as extravagant (John 12:1-11; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p>(4) Mary the wife of Clopas was also among the women watching when Jesus was crucified (John 19:25). Her husband, Clopas, is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:55-61; 28:1; Mark 15:40-47; 16:1-11; Luke 8:2-3; 10:38-42; 24:1-10; John 11:1-6, 17-24; 12:3-8; 19:25; 20:1-2, 11-18; Acts 12:12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","summary_en":"Women Named Mary Four other Marys, apart from the mother of Jesus, are mentioned in the Gospels: (1) Mary Magdalene (probably from Magdala in Galilee) was freed from demon possession by Jesus (Mark 16:9) and became a faithful follower and financial supporter of Jesus and his disciples (Luke 8:1-3; see also Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41). She was present when Jesus was crucified and buried (Matt 27:55-61; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25; cp. Luke 23:49, 55-56), and she went to the tomb early on Sunda...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125260,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","title_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus","content_ro":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Martha, Mary, and Lazarus<\/h3>\n<p>The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31).<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upset with her sister for not helping her prepare the meal. Jesus defended Mary’s desire to simply sit and learn from him as the most important thing.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel relays Jesus’ act of raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). When Jesus arrived in Bethany, four days after Lazarus had died, the sisters expressed their dismay that Jesus had not come in time to heal their sick brother, and Jesus was deeply moved by the weeping of Lazarus’s family and friends. He went to the tomb and ordered Lazarus to come out. To everyone’s astonishment, he did so, bound in the cloths he had been buried in. This amazing miracle exemplifies Jesus as the giver of eternal life (John 11:25-26). Ironically, this act of restoring Lazarus’s life also galvanized the Jewish leaders to bring about Jesus’ death because so many people were responding to Jesus’ miracles (John 11:47-53; 12:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Soon thereafter, when the family invited Jesus to their home for a celebration meal, Mary poured a bottle of extremely expensive perfume on Jesus. When people criticized her for what they considered an extravagant waste, Jesus defended her action, saying that it anticipated his coming death (John 12:1-8; cp. Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44; 12:1-11, 17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","summary_en":"Martha, Mary, and Lazarus The sisters Martha and Mary lived with their brother Lazarus in Bethany, near Jerusalem; Jesus loved and spent time with this family. Martha and Mary are mentioned only in the Gospels of Luke and John, while Lazarus appears only in John (this Lazarus is not Lazarus the beggar from Luke 16:19-31). Luke’s account of these two sisters (10:38-42) focuses on the contrast between Martha and Mary. When Jesus visited their home, Martha was busy in the kitchen and became upse...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4399,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethany","title_en":"Bethany","content_ro":"<h3>BETHANY<\/h3>\n<li>1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11:1, 18). The village was near Bethphage on an approach to Jerusalem (Mk 11:1; Lk 19:29) that Jesus followed in preparation for his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In Bethany Jesus blessed his disciples after the resurrection and parted from them (Lk 24:50). Today the town is called el-Azariyeh (the place of Lazarus).<\/li>\n<li>2. Village on “the other side of the Jordan” (the east side), where John the Baptist baptized (Jn 1:28).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHANY<\/h3>\n<li>1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (Jn 11:1, 18). The village was near Bethphage on an approach to Jerusalem (Mk 11:1; Lk 19:29) that Jesus followed in preparation for his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In Bethany Jesus blessed his disciples after the resurrection and parted from them (Lk 24:50). Today the town is called el-Azariyeh (the place of Lazarus).<\/li>\n<li>2. Village on “the other side of the Jordan” (the east side), where John the Baptist baptized (Jn 1:28).<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHANY 1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus rai...","summary_en":"BETHANY 1. Village on the eastern slope of the Mt of Olives about a mile and a half (2.4 kilometers) east of Jerusalem. Jesus and his disciples sometimes stayed in Bethany when in Judea, as when they attended temple observances during Passover (Mt 21:17; Mk 11:11). Jesus was eating at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany when a woman came and anointed his head with costly perfume (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). Bethany was also the home of Mary and Martha and their brother Lazarus, where Jesus rai...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19528,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24586,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mary","title_en":"Mary","content_ro":"<h3>MARY<\/h3>\n<p>Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, then traveled to Bethlehem (Joseph’s hometown) for a census, where Jesus was born (Mt 2:1; Lk 1:5; 2:4-5). Matthew informs us that shortly after the birth the family had to flee to Egypt to escape Herod (Mt 2:13-14). Later, the family resided again in Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39).<\/p>\n<p>We have little other information about Mary. She was certainly a concerned mother (as her scolding of Jesus in Lk 2:48 shows), and she later had a high estimate of Jesus’ ability (as at the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:1-4). She had several other sons and daughters to care for. She appeared at the foot of the cross, where Jesus asked “the beloved disciple” to care for her in her grief (Jn 19:25-27). After the resurrection she and Jesus’ brothers were among the disciples who experienced the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 1:14). No further mention is made of her.<\/p>\n<p>Mary’s song of praise, “The Magnificat” (Lk 1:46-55) displays her sterling humility and trust in God’s will. She is truly “blessed among women” (v 42).<\/p>\n<li>2. Mary, the mother of James and Joseph. This woman goes by several names, but in each account she appears among Jesus’ faithful female disciples, standing by the cross and witnessing the empty tomb. Matthew calls her “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” or just “the other Mary” (27:56, 61; 28:1); Mark names her “Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses,” “Mary the mother of Joses,” or “Mary the mother of James” (15:40, 47; 16:1); in John’s Gospel, she is “Mary wife of Clopas” (19:25), though she may possibly be a separate Mary. Tradition has it that this Mary was Jesus’ aunt, as Clopas was Joseph’s brother (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.11).<\/li>\n<li>3. Mary Magdalene. We know little about this woman other than that her name indicates that she was from Magdala in Galilee. Somewhere in Galilee she met Jesus, who cast seven demons out of her. She then joined the band of disciples and followed Jesus wherever he went (Lk 8:2), ending up in Jerusalem at the foot of the cross when all the male disciples had fled (Mk 15:40; Jn 19:25). She observed Jesus’ burial (Mk 15:47) and witnessed the events surrounding the resurrection. Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and Luke 24:10 group her with the other women who went to the tomb. John says that she was the first among these women to discover the empty tomb, the first to report to the disciples, and the first to see the risen Christ as she lingered by the tomb after all the others had left (Jn 20:1-2, 11-18). This faithful disciple, however, was not allowed to touch her Lord (v 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Mary of Bethany. This Judean Mary was the sister of Martha and Lazarus. We know three facts about her. First, she was such a devoted follower of Jesus that she neglected her household duties to listen to him (Lk 10:38-42; Jesus approved this). Second, she was apparently upset with Jesus when he did not come to heal her brother before he died (Jn 11:20, 28-33). Finally, before Jesus died, she anointed him with an expensive ointment while he feasted at her home in Bethany (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:1-8).<\/li>\n<li>5. Mary, mother of John Mark. This woman appears only once in Scripture (Acts 12:12). Her house was the meeting place of the persecuted church. Since it was apparently large and she had servants, she was a wealthy woman, probably a widow (since no husband is mentioned). In her house the church prayed for Peter, and Peter came there after being released from prison. Her son John Mark accompanied Paul and probably Peter as well.<\/li>\n<li>6. Mary of Rome. In Romans 16:6 Paul greets a woman in Rome named simply “Mary, who has worked hard among you.” At some time she had been in Greece or Asia Minor, perhaps being expelled from Rome with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; c. <span>AD<\/span> 49). While there she had met Paul, perhaps being converted by him, and had worked hard with him in his work of evangelism or caring for the church. By <span>AD<\/span> 56 (a probable date for the book of Romans), she had returned to Rome. She was distinguished by the praise Paul heaped upon her and his other coworkers living in Rome.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>MARY<\/h3>\n<p>Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, then traveled to Bethlehem (Joseph’s hometown) for a census, where Jesus was born (Mt 2:1; Lk 1:5; 2:4-5). Matthew informs us that shortly after the birth the family had to flee to Egypt to escape Herod (Mt 2:13-14). Later, the family resided again in Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39).<\/p>\n<p>We have little other information about Mary. She was certainly a concerned mother (as her scolding of Jesus in Lk 2:48 shows), and she later had a high estimate of Jesus’ ability (as at the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:1-4). She had several other sons and daughters to care for. She appeared at the foot of the cross, where Jesus asked “the beloved disciple” to care for her in her grief (Jn 19:25-27). After the resurrection she and Jesus’ brothers were among the disciples who experienced the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 1:14). No further mention is made of her.<\/p>\n<p>Mary’s song of praise, “The Magnificat” (Lk 1:46-55) displays her sterling humility and trust in God’s will. She is truly “blessed among women” (v 42).<\/p>\n<li>2. Mary, the mother of James and Joseph. This woman goes by several names, but in each account she appears among Jesus’ faithful female disciples, standing by the cross and witnessing the empty tomb. Matthew calls her “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” or just “the other Mary” (27:56, 61; 28:1); Mark names her “Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses,” “Mary the mother of Joses,” or “Mary the mother of James” (15:40, 47; 16:1); in John’s Gospel, she is “Mary wife of Clopas” (19:25), though she may possibly be a separate Mary. Tradition has it that this Mary was Jesus’ aunt, as Clopas was Joseph’s brother (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.11).<\/li>\n<li>3. Mary Magdalene. We know little about this woman other than that her name indicates that she was from Magdala in Galilee. Somewhere in Galilee she met Jesus, who cast seven demons out of her. She then joined the band of disciples and followed Jesus wherever he went (Lk 8:2), ending up in Jerusalem at the foot of the cross when all the male disciples had fled (Mk 15:40; Jn 19:25). She observed Jesus’ burial (Mk 15:47) and witnessed the events surrounding the resurrection. Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, and Luke 24:10 group her with the other women who went to the tomb. John says that she was the first among these women to discover the empty tomb, the first to report to the disciples, and the first to see the risen Christ as she lingered by the tomb after all the others had left (Jn 20:1-2, 11-18). This faithful disciple, however, was not allowed to touch her Lord (v 17).<\/li>\n<li>4. Mary of Bethany. This Judean Mary was the sister of Martha and Lazarus. We know three facts about her. First, she was such a devoted follower of Jesus that she neglected her household duties to listen to him (Lk 10:38-42; Jesus approved this). Second, she was apparently upset with Jesus when he did not come to heal her brother before he died (Jn 11:20, 28-33). Finally, before Jesus died, she anointed him with an expensive ointment while he feasted at her home in Bethany (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:1-8).<\/li>\n<li>5. Mary, mother of John Mark. This woman appears only once in Scripture (Acts 12:12). Her house was the meeting place of the persecuted church. Since it was apparently large and she had servants, she was a wealthy woman, probably a widow (since no husband is mentioned). In her house the church prayed for Peter, and Peter came there after being released from prison. Her son John Mark accompanied Paul and probably Peter as well.<\/li>\n<li>6. Mary of Rome. In Romans 16:6 Paul greets a woman in Rome named simply “Mary, who has worked hard among you.” At some time she had been in Greece or Asia Minor, perhaps being expelled from Rome with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; c. <span>AD<\/span> 49). While there she had met Paul, perhaps being converted by him, and had worked hard with him in his work of evangelism or caring for the church. By <span>AD<\/span> 56 (a probable date for the book of Romans), she had returned to Rome. She was distinguished by the praise Paul heaped upon her and his other coworkers living in Rome.<\/li>","summary_ro":"MARY Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT. 1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, the...","summary_en":"MARY Popular feminine name among first-century Jews, borne by six (or seven) women in the NT. 1. Mary, the mother of Jesus. According to the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, Mary was a young Jewish virgin, probably from the tribe of Judah, who during her engagement to Joseph (of Davidic descent from the tribe of Judah) was discovered to be pregnant. This was due to her submission to the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38). The couple married and lived first in Nazareth of Galilee, the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24833,"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":35441,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Simon","title_en":"Simon","content_ro":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","summary_ro":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","summary_en":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55038,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","summary_en":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55039,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","summary_en":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82664,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","summary_en":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82665,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","summary_en":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110290,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","summary_en":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110291,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","summary_en":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137916,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6-13<\/strong> A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","summary_en":"26:6-13 A similar anointing took place earlier in Galilee (Luke 7:36-50). Matthew’s insertion of the episode at this point (cp. John 12:1-8) sets the Jewish leaders’ murderous plotting (Matt 26:3-5) and Judas’s betrayal (26:14-16) in sharp contrast to the woman’s praiseworthy actions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137917,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:6<\/strong> <em>Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy:<\/em> Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","summary_en":"26:6 Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy: Jesus’ presence in the man’s home exhibited the forgiving, healing love Jesus often showed toward outcasts (see 8:7; 9:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":15575,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Head","title_en":"Head","content_ro":"<h3>HEAD<\/h3>\n<p>The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for <em>head<\/em> is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority.<\/p>\n<p>To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mountain peaks (Gn 8:5), the tops of buildings (Gn 11:4) or trees (2 Sm 5:24), and river sources (Gn 2:10). The term was commonly used to designate positions of political, military, or familiar authority. In this sense the “head” exercised control over all those subjected to him (Jgs 10:18; 1 Sm 15:17; Ps 18:43; Is 7:8-9; Jer 31:7; Hos 1:11). David was called the “keeper of mine head” (<span>kjv<\/span>) when he served as the bodyguard of Achish (1 Sm 28:2; cf. Jgs 9:53; Ps 68:21).<\/p>\n<p>Greek philosophers used the image of the body to represent the universe. The head of this body—called Zeus or Reason—was considered responsible for the creation and sustenance of the remaining members (celestial beings, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate objects). The universe, or “body,” owed its existence to the “head.”<\/p>\n<p>Between 460 <span>BC<\/span> (the date usually ascribed to the first writings of Hippocrates) and <span>AD<\/span> 200 (the death of Galen, who developed Hippocrates’ findings), Greek medical science came to understand the head as the seat of intelligence. The body was able to operate efficiently only because the brain was capable of interpreting data received from the body (eyes, ears, skin, and so on), and because it was able to send out appropriate impulses to the various members of the body, based upon the data received. The ability of the brain to interpret and direct made the existence of the body completely dependent upon it.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the term refers to the actual human head (Mt 5:36; 6:17; 14:8; 26:7; Mk 6:27; 14:3; Lk 7:46; Jn 13:9; 20:7), to apocalyptic beings (Rv 1:14; 4:4; 12:1), and to animals (Rv 9:7, 17, 19; 12:3). Furthermore, it appears in such expressions as “to heap coals of fire upon the head,” meaning to return good for evil (Rom 12:20; cf. Mt 5:44); to “shear” or “anoint the head” expressing a vow (Acts 21:24); and “to lay down the head,” meaning to sleep (Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul drew from the OT metaphorical understanding of the term to express the headship of God over Christ, Christ over man, and man over woman (1 Cor 11:3-16; cf. Eph 5:23). In the light of these relationships, Paul encouraged women at Corinth to wear veils in worship. The veil gave a woman the authority to worship as an equal with men before God. The term is used again with the meaning “authority” to express the lordship of Christ over the universe (Eph 1:21-22; Col 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the image of the head and body to express the relationship between Christ and his church (Eph 4:15; 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 12:12-27). In addition to the OT sense, the contributions of medical science in Paul’s day may provide insight into this image, for Christ is not only the dominant ruler over the church but also the dynamic force that provides its direction and unity. The ability of the church to exist and the focal point of its activity are rooted in the work of its “head,” Jesus Christ. In this light, various modern exegetes have argued that headship does not mean “authority” as much as it means “source,” as in the term “fountainhead.” Thus, he who is the head is the source, the supplier. These interpreters see God as being Christ’s supplier, and Christ being the church’s supplier, and man being woman’s supplier.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAD<\/h3>\n<p>The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for <em>head<\/em> is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority.<\/p>\n<p>To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mountain peaks (Gn 8:5), the tops of buildings (Gn 11:4) or trees (2 Sm 5:24), and river sources (Gn 2:10). The term was commonly used to designate positions of political, military, or familiar authority. In this sense the “head” exercised control over all those subjected to him (Jgs 10:18; 1 Sm 15:17; Ps 18:43; Is 7:8-9; Jer 31:7; Hos 1:11). David was called the “keeper of mine head” (<span>kjv<\/span>) when he served as the bodyguard of Achish (1 Sm 28:2; cf. Jgs 9:53; Ps 68:21).<\/p>\n<p>Greek philosophers used the image of the body to represent the universe. The head of this body—called Zeus or Reason—was considered responsible for the creation and sustenance of the remaining members (celestial beings, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate objects). The universe, or “body,” owed its existence to the “head.”<\/p>\n<p>Between 460 <span>BC<\/span> (the date usually ascribed to the first writings of Hippocrates) and <span>AD<\/span> 200 (the death of Galen, who developed Hippocrates’ findings), Greek medical science came to understand the head as the seat of intelligence. The body was able to operate efficiently only because the brain was capable of interpreting data received from the body (eyes, ears, skin, and so on), and because it was able to send out appropriate impulses to the various members of the body, based upon the data received. The ability of the brain to interpret and direct made the existence of the body completely dependent upon it.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the term refers to the actual human head (Mt 5:36; 6:17; 14:8; 26:7; Mk 6:27; 14:3; Lk 7:46; Jn 13:9; 20:7), to apocalyptic beings (Rv 1:14; 4:4; 12:1), and to animals (Rv 9:7, 17, 19; 12:3). Furthermore, it appears in such expressions as “to heap coals of fire upon the head,” meaning to return good for evil (Rom 12:20; cf. Mt 5:44); to “shear” or “anoint the head” expressing a vow (Acts 21:24); and “to lay down the head,” meaning to sleep (Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul drew from the OT metaphorical understanding of the term to express the headship of God over Christ, Christ over man, and man over woman (1 Cor 11:3-16; cf. Eph 5:23). In the light of these relationships, Paul encouraged women at Corinth to wear veils in worship. The veil gave a woman the authority to worship as an equal with men before God. The term is used again with the meaning “authority” to express the lordship of Christ over the universe (Eph 1:21-22; Col 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the image of the head and body to express the relationship between Christ and his church (Eph 4:15; 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 12:12-27). In addition to the OT sense, the contributions of medical science in Paul’s day may provide insight into this image, for Christ is not only the dominant ruler over the church but also the dynamic force that provides its direction and unity. The ability of the church to exist and the focal point of its activity are rooted in the work of its “head,” Jesus Christ. In this light, various modern exegetes have argued that headship does not mean “authority” as much as it means “source,” as in the term “fountainhead.” Thus, he who is the head is the source, the supplier. These interpreters see God as being Christ’s supplier, and Christ being the church’s supplier, and man being woman’s supplier.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAD The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority. To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mounta...","summary_en":"HEAD The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority. To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mounta...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29608,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Perfume","title_en":"Perfume","content_ro":"<h3>PERFUME<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a wide range of materials prepared from ground-up minerals, vegetable oils, and roots, which were used from the earliest times to enhance one’s personal presentation or to produce pleasing fragrances both for secular and religious purposes. The Bible mentions a wide variety of perfumes, such as aloes, balm, balsam, bdellium, cassia, cinnamon, frankincense, gum, myrrh, nard, sweet cane, spice, ointment, and so on. There must have been a vigorous perfume trade with such lands as Arabia (frankincense, myrrh), India (aloes, nard), Ceylon (cinnamon), Persia (the spice galbanum), and Somaliland (frankincense). In the Bible there are several references to those who traded in these items; for example, the Arabian (Ishmaelite) merchants who took Joseph to Egypt (Gn 37:25), the caravans of the queen of Sheba (1 Kgs 10:10), and the traders of Sheba and Raamah who brought spices to Tyre (Ez 27:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are several biblical references to those who prepared perfumes. For example, Bezalel prepared holy anointing oil and sacred incense for the tabernacle (Ex 37:29). The holy anointing oil was a mixture of four constituents (30:22-25): myrrh, cinnamon, aromatic cane, and cassia mixed in olive oil. In postexilic times, some priests were given the responsibility of mixing perfumes for incense (1 Chr 9:30), and a perfumer is mentioned among those who built Nehemiah’s wall (Neh 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>Modern excavation has produced tangible evidence of a variety of cosmetic vessels and appliances, although, strangely enough, little is said in the Bible about these (Is 3:20; Mt 26:7; Mk 14:3; Lk 7:37). The reference to alabaster containers gains support from their use in Egypt and from archaeology. Some ancient sites in Palestine have yielded numerous small decorated cosmetic bowls, often made of alabaster; small bottles for scents and oils; and palettes for mixing cosmetics. Some of these items are imports from lands like Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>There was a wide range of uses for the various perfumes, whether powders or oils. Perfumed oils were regularly used to anoint the body in order to soothe sun-dried skin (2 Sm 12:20; Ru 3:3). On one occasion, King Ahaz clothed, fed, and anointed men who returned home from captivity (2 Chr 28:15). The rich in the land could afford the “finest oils” (Am 6:6), although such extravagance could be costly (Prv 21:17). This biblical picture is corroborated by evidence from Egypt and Mesopotamia. In particular, there was a lavish use of oils and ointments in the royal palaces of the East.<\/p>\n\n<p>Ointments and oils of various kinds that gave off a pleasing fragrance were regularly used. The Song of Songs has many references to such ointments (Sg 1:3), some of which are specifically named: spikenard (1:12; 4:13-14), myrrh (1:13; 3:6; 4:6; 5:1, 5, 13), frankincense (3:6; 4:6), spices (5:13; 6:2; 8:14), henna (1:14; 4:13), fragrant powders (3:6), saffron (4:14), calamus, and cinnamon (4:14). And there are references in other parts of the Bible to perfumes and ointments of various kinds (1 Kgs 10:2, 10; 2 Kgs 20:13; Prv 27:9; Is 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>Perfumes were put on clothes (Ps 45:8; Sg 4:11) and sprinkled on couches (Prv 7:17). Perfumes and spices also played an important role in the burial of the dead. They were used in embalming (Gn 50:2-3, 26) and were sprinkled on the bier or burned in the fire at some funerals (2 Chr 16:14). Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes to be used in wrapping the body of Jesus (Jn 19:39-40). In the funeral of Herod the Great, 500 slaves carried the spices (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 17.8.3).<\/p>\n<p>Besides the personal use of such materials, there was a wide range of oils, perfumes, and incense used in worship. A holy anointing oil was used to anoint the tabernacle and its furnishings and the Aaronic priests at their induction (Ex 30:22-25; Ps 133). An interesting prescription for the sacred incense to be prepared by the perfumer is given in Exodus 30:34-35. The items listed are well known both in Israel and in other parts of the ancient East.<\/p>\n<p>The NT contains a number of figurative references. Christ gave himself as a fragrant offering to God (Eph 5:2). The gifts of the Philippians to Paul were described as a fragrant offering (Phil 4:18) and the prayers of the saints are described as bowls of incense (Rv 5:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cosmetics; Oil; Ointment; Perfumer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PERFUME<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a wide range of materials prepared from ground-up minerals, vegetable oils, and roots, which were used from the earliest times to enhance one’s personal presentation or to produce pleasing fragrances both for secular and religious purposes. The Bible mentions a wide variety of perfumes, such as aloes, balm, balsam, bdellium, cassia, cinnamon, frankincense, gum, myrrh, nard, sweet cane, spice, ointment, and so on. There must have been a vigorous perfume trade with such lands as Arabia (frankincense, myrrh), India (aloes, nard), Ceylon (cinnamon), Persia (the spice galbanum), and Somaliland (frankincense). In the Bible there are several references to those who traded in these items; for example, the Arabian (Ishmaelite) merchants who took Joseph to Egypt (Gn 37:25), the caravans of the queen of Sheba (1 Kgs 10:10), and the traders of Sheba and Raamah who brought spices to Tyre (Ez 27:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are several biblical references to those who prepared perfumes. For example, Bezalel prepared holy anointing oil and sacred incense for the tabernacle (Ex 37:29). The holy anointing oil was a mixture of four constituents (30:22-25): myrrh, cinnamon, aromatic cane, and cassia mixed in olive oil. In postexilic times, some priests were given the responsibility of mixing perfumes for incense (1 Chr 9:30), and a perfumer is mentioned among those who built Nehemiah’s wall (Neh 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>Modern excavation has produced tangible evidence of a variety of cosmetic vessels and appliances, although, strangely enough, little is said in the Bible about these (Is 3:20; Mt 26:7; Mk 14:3; Lk 7:37). The reference to alabaster containers gains support from their use in Egypt and from archaeology. Some ancient sites in Palestine have yielded numerous small decorated cosmetic bowls, often made of alabaster; small bottles for scents and oils; and palettes for mixing cosmetics. Some of these items are imports from lands like Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>There was a wide range of uses for the various perfumes, whether powders or oils. Perfumed oils were regularly used to anoint the body in order to soothe sun-dried skin (2 Sm 12:20; Ru 3:3). On one occasion, King Ahaz clothed, fed, and anointed men who returned home from captivity (2 Chr 28:15). The rich in the land could afford the “finest oils” (Am 6:6), although such extravagance could be costly (Prv 21:17). This biblical picture is corroborated by evidence from Egypt and Mesopotamia. In particular, there was a lavish use of oils and ointments in the royal palaces of the East.<\/p>\n\n<p>Ointments and oils of various kinds that gave off a pleasing fragrance were regularly used. The Song of Songs has many references to such ointments (Sg 1:3), some of which are specifically named: spikenard (1:12; 4:13-14), myrrh (1:13; 3:6; 4:6; 5:1, 5, 13), frankincense (3:6; 4:6), spices (5:13; 6:2; 8:14), henna (1:14; 4:13), fragrant powders (3:6), saffron (4:14), calamus, and cinnamon (4:14). And there are references in other parts of the Bible to perfumes and ointments of various kinds (1 Kgs 10:2, 10; 2 Kgs 20:13; Prv 27:9; Is 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>Perfumes were put on clothes (Ps 45:8; Sg 4:11) and sprinkled on couches (Prv 7:17). Perfumes and spices also played an important role in the burial of the dead. They were used in embalming (Gn 50:2-3, 26) and were sprinkled on the bier or burned in the fire at some funerals (2 Chr 16:14). Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes to be used in wrapping the body of Jesus (Jn 19:39-40). In the funeral of Herod the Great, 500 slaves carried the spices (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 17.8.3).<\/p>\n<p>Besides the personal use of such materials, there was a wide range of oils, perfumes, and incense used in worship. A holy anointing oil was used to anoint the tabernacle and its furnishings and the Aaronic priests at their induction (Ex 30:22-25; Ps 133). An interesting prescription for the sacred incense to be prepared by the perfumer is given in Exodus 30:34-35. The items listed are well known both in Israel and in other parts of the ancient East.<\/p>\n<p>The NT contains a number of figurative references. Christ gave himself as a fragrant offering to God (Eph 5:2). The gifts of the Philippians to Paul were described as a fragrant offering (Phil 4:18) and the prayers of the saints are described as bowls of incense (Rv 5:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cosmetics; Oil; Ointment; Perfumer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PERFUME Term covering a wide range of materials prepared from ground-up minerals, vegetable oils, and roots, which were used from the earliest times to enhance one’s personal presentation or to produce pleasing fragrances both for secular and religious purposes. The Bible mentions a wide variety of perfumes, such as aloes, balm, balsam, bdellium, cassia, cinnamon, frankincense, gum, myrrh, nard, sweet cane, spice, ointment, and so on. There must have been a vigorous perfume trade with such la...","summary_en":"PERFUME Term covering a wide range of materials prepared from ground-up minerals, vegetable oils, and roots, which were used from the earliest times to enhance one’s personal presentation or to produce pleasing fragrances both for secular and religious purposes. The Bible mentions a wide variety of perfumes, such as aloes, balm, balsam, bdellium, cassia, cinnamon, frankincense, gum, myrrh, nard, sweet cane, spice, ointment, and so on. There must have been a vigorous perfume trade with such la...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36329,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Precious Stones","title_en":"Precious Stones","content_ro":"<h3>STONES, Precious<\/h3>\n<p>A lengthy list of the precious stones used in OT times occurs in Exodus 28:17-20 and 39:10-13, where four rows of three stones, each engraved with the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel, were set in the high priest’s breastplate. Other lists occur in Ezekiel 28:13 and Revelation 21:19-21. It is difficult to properly identify all of these stones, since an accurate translation is not always possible. Some of the differences of translation are indicated in the following list, as translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>:<\/p>\n<p class=\"list-space\" id=\"Agate\"> 1. Agate, an oxide of silicon, a type of translucent quartz with layers of different colors (Ex 28:19; 39:12; Is 54:12; Rv 21:19).<\/p>\n<li> 2. Alabaster, a finely granular banded variety of calcium carbonate (gypsum), often white and translucent and widely used in Bible times for ornamental vases, bowls, kohl pots, statues, perfume jars, and so on (Sg 5:15; Mt 26:7; Mk 14:3; Lk 7:37).<\/li>\n<li> 3. Amethyst, an oxide of silicon, a purple or violet variety of transparent crystalline quartz (Ex 28:19; 39:12; Rv 21:20).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Beryl, a silicate of aluminum (Ex 28:20; 39:13; Sg 5:14; Dn 10:6). It is usually green in color (Rv 21:20) but can be blue, white, or golden and may be either opaque or transparent—the latter variety including the gems emerald and aquamarine.<\/li>\n<li> 5. Carbuncle. See Emerald below.<\/li>\n<p class=\"list\" id=\"Carnelian\"> 6. Carnelian, a silicon oxide reddish in color. In translations it is sometimes equated with sardius (Ex 28:17; 39:10; Ez 28:13), a type of deep brown or red quartz (Rv 4:3; 21:20).<\/p>\n<li> 7. Chalcedony. See Agate above.<\/li>\n<li> 8. Chrysolite, an aluminum fluosilicate, yellowish in color (Rv 21:20), probably equivalent to topaz (Ex 28:17) or beryl (Ez 1:16; 10:9; 28:13).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Chrysoprase, a nickel-stained apple-green chalcedony widely used in jewelry (Rv 21:20).<\/li>\n<li>10. Coral, the hard calcareous skeleton of a variety of marine animals occurring in various colors—red, white, and black. It is not strictly a stone (Jb 28:18; Ez 27:16).<\/li>\n<li>11. Crystal, a clear, translucent crystalline quartz (Jb 28:18). In Revelation 4:6, 21:11, and 22:1 the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">krystallon<\/span> may be rock crystal or even ice.<\/li>\n<li>12. Diamond, a stone of uncertain identification (Ex 28:18; 39:11; Ez 28:13). It may not be the equivalent of the modern diamond. In Jeremiah 17:1, adamant was probably a form of corundum, a very hard substance.<\/li>\n<p class=\"list\" id=\"Emerald\">13. Emerald, probably a green stone like the modern emerald (Ex 28:18; 39:11; Ez 27:16; 28:13). The Septuagint suggests a purple stone like a garnet. In the NT <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">smaragdinos<\/span> in Revelation 4:3 and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">smaragdos<\/span> in Revelation 21:19 suggest an emerald.<\/p>\n<li>14. Jacinth, perhaps a reddish-orange zircon or a blue stone such as turquoise, amethyst, or sapphire (Ex 28:19; 39:12). In Revelation 21:20 <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">huakinthos<\/span> is a blue stone. The exact identification is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>15. Jasper, a compact, opaque, often highly colored crystalline quartz substance (Ex 28:20; 39:13). In the NT the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">iaspis<\/span> (Rv 4:3; 21:11, 18-19) is a green quartz.<\/li>\n<li>16. Lapis lazuli, a deep blue stone; a compound of sodium, aluminum, calcium, sulphur, and silver containing a mixture of several minerals. It generally has golden flecks of iron pyrites and was widely used for ornamental purposes in the ancient world. It is akin to sapphire.<\/li>\n<li>17. Marble, a limestone crystallized by metamorphism, taking a high polish, durable and suitable for building purposes (1 Chr 29:2; Est 1:6; Rv 18:12).<\/li>\n<li>18. Onyx, a quartz consisting of straight layers or bands which differ in color (Gn 2:12; Ex 25:7; 28:9, 20; 39:6, 13; 1 Chr 29:2; Jb 28:16; Ez 28:13). See Sardonyx below.<\/li>\n<li>19. Pearl, a hard smooth substance, white or variously colored, which grows in the shell of various bivalve mollusks. In the NT “pearls” are known as ornaments for women (1 Tm 2:9; Rv 17:4) or as items for trade (Rv 18:12, 16). The kingdom of heaven is likened to a fine pearl, which people seek at great cost (Mt 13:45-46).<\/li>\n<li>20. Ruby, an uncertain translation of the Hebrew word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">peninim<\/span> in six places (Jb 28:18; Prv 3:15; 8:11; 20:15; 31:10; Lam 4:7). This deep red or carmine stone was probably known in the ancient world, but there are difficulties in the translation of terms that may refer to it.<\/li>\n<li>21. Sapphire, a deep blue stone (Ex 24:10; 28:18; 39:11; Jb 28:6, 16; Sg 5:14; Is 54:11; Lam 4:7; Ez 1:26; 10:1; 28:13), which may have referred at times to lapis lazuli as in Job 28:6 and Revelation 21:19.<\/li>\n<li>22. Sardius, a red or deep brown form of quartz (Ex 28:17; 39:10; Ez 28:13 <span>kjv<\/span>). It is referred to also in Revelation 4:3 (<span>kjv<\/span> “sardine stone”), though in modern versions it is often rendered as “carnelian.” See Carnelian above.<\/li>\n<p class=\"list\" id=\"Sardonyx\">23. Sardonyx, a form of agate with layers of brown and white (Rv 21:20, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; “onyx” in <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<li>24. Topaz, a yellow stone, a fluosilicate of aluminum occurring in crystalline form (Ex 28:17; 39:10; Jb 28:19; Ez 28:13; Rv 21:20).<\/li>\n<p\/>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>STONES, Precious<\/h3>\n<p>A lengthy list of the precious stones used in OT times occurs in Exodus 28:17-20 and 39:10-13, where four rows of three stones, each engraved with the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel, were set in the high priest’s breastplate. Other lists occur in Ezekiel 28:13 and Revelation 21:19-21. It is difficult to properly identify all of these stones, since an accurate translation is not always possible. Some of the differences of translation are indicated in the following list, as translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>:<\/p>\n<p class=\"list-space\" id=\"Agate\"> 1. Agate, an oxide of silicon, a type of translucent quartz with layers of different colors (Ex 28:19; 39:12; Is 54:12; Rv 21:19).<\/p>\n<li> 2. Alabaster, a finely granular banded variety of calcium carbonate (gypsum), often white and translucent and widely used in Bible times for ornamental vases, bowls, kohl pots, statues, perfume jars, and so on (Sg 5:15; Mt 26:7; Mk 14:3; Lk 7:37).<\/li>\n<li> 3. Amethyst, an oxide of silicon, a purple or violet variety of transparent crystalline quartz (Ex 28:19; 39:12; Rv 21:20).<\/li>\n<li> 4. Beryl, a silicate of aluminum (Ex 28:20; 39:13; Sg 5:14; Dn 10:6). It is usually green in color (Rv 21:20) but can be blue, white, or golden and may be either opaque or transparent—the latter variety including the gems emerald and aquamarine.<\/li>\n<li> 5. Carbuncle. See Emerald below.<\/li>\n<p class=\"list\" id=\"Carnelian\"> 6. Carnelian, a silicon oxide reddish in color. In translations it is sometimes equated with sardius (Ex 28:17; 39:10; Ez 28:13), a type of deep brown or red quartz (Rv 4:3; 21:20).<\/p>\n<li> 7. Chalcedony. See Agate above.<\/li>\n<li> 8. Chrysolite, an aluminum fluosilicate, yellowish in color (Rv 21:20), probably equivalent to topaz (Ex 28:17) or beryl (Ez 1:16; 10:9; 28:13).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Chrysoprase, a nickel-stained apple-green chalcedony widely used in jewelry (Rv 21:20).<\/li>\n<li>10. Coral, the hard calcareous skeleton of a variety of marine animals occurring in various colors—red, white, and black. It is not strictly a stone (Jb 28:18; Ez 27:16).<\/li>\n<li>11. Crystal, a clear, translucent crystalline quartz (Jb 28:18). In Revelation 4:6, 21:11, and 22:1 the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">krystallon<\/span> may be rock crystal or even ice.<\/li>\n<li>12. Diamond, a stone of uncertain identification (Ex 28:18; 39:11; Ez 28:13). It may not be the equivalent of the modern diamond. In Jeremiah 17:1, adamant was probably a form of corundum, a very hard substance.<\/li>\n<p class=\"list\" id=\"Emerald\">13. Emerald, probably a green stone like the modern emerald (Ex 28:18; 39:11; Ez 27:16; 28:13). The Septuagint suggests a purple stone like a garnet. In the NT <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">smaragdinos<\/span> in Revelation 4:3 and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">smaragdos<\/span> in Revelation 21:19 suggest an emerald.<\/p>\n<li>14. Jacinth, perhaps a reddish-orange zircon or a blue stone such as turquoise, amethyst, or sapphire (Ex 28:19; 39:12). In Revelation 21:20 <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">huakinthos<\/span> is a blue stone. The exact identification is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>15. Jasper, a compact, opaque, often highly colored crystalline quartz substance (Ex 28:20; 39:13). In the NT the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">iaspis<\/span> (Rv 4:3; 21:11, 18-19) is a green quartz.<\/li>\n<li>16. Lapis lazuli, a deep blue stone; a compound of sodium, aluminum, calcium, sulphur, and silver containing a mixture of several minerals. It generally has golden flecks of iron pyrites and was widely used for ornamental purposes in the ancient world. It is akin to sapphire.<\/li>\n<li>17. Marble, a limestone crystallized by metamorphism, taking a high polish, durable and suitable for building purposes (1 Chr 29:2; Est 1:6; Rv 18:12).<\/li>\n<li>18. Onyx, a quartz consisting of straight layers or bands which differ in color (Gn 2:12; Ex 25:7; 28:9, 20; 39:6, 13; 1 Chr 29:2; Jb 28:16; Ez 28:13). See Sardonyx below.<\/li>\n<li>19. Pearl, a hard smooth substance, white or variously colored, which grows in the shell of various bivalve mollusks. In the NT “pearls” are known as ornaments for women (1 Tm 2:9; Rv 17:4) or as items for trade (Rv 18:12, 16). The kingdom of heaven is likened to a fine pearl, which people seek at great cost (Mt 13:45-46).<\/li>\n<li>20. Ruby, an uncertain translation of the Hebrew word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">peninim<\/span> in six places (Jb 28:18; Prv 3:15; 8:11; 20:15; 31:10; Lam 4:7). This deep red or carmine stone was probably known in the ancient world, but there are difficulties in the translation of terms that may refer to it.<\/li>\n<li>21. Sapphire, a deep blue stone (Ex 24:10; 28:18; 39:11; Jb 28:6, 16; Sg 5:14; Is 54:11; Lam 4:7; Ez 1:26; 10:1; 28:13), which may have referred at times to lapis lazuli as in Job 28:6 and Revelation 21:19.<\/li>\n<li>22. Sardius, a red or deep brown form of quartz (Ex 28:17; 39:10; Ez 28:13 <span>kjv<\/span>). It is referred to also in Revelation 4:3 (<span>kjv<\/span> “sardine stone”), though in modern versions it is often rendered as “carnelian.” See Carnelian above.<\/li>\n<p class=\"list\" id=\"Sardonyx\">23. Sardonyx, a form of agate with layers of brown and white (Rv 21:20, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; “onyx” in <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<li>24. Topaz, a yellow stone, a fluosilicate of aluminum occurring in crystalline form (Ex 28:17; 39:10; Jb 28:19; Ez 28:13; Rv 21:20).<\/li>\n<p\/>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"STONES, Precious A lengthy list of the precious stones used in OT times occurs in Exodus 28:17-20 and 39:10-13, where four rows of three stones, each engraved with the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel, were set in the high priest’s breastplate. Other lists occur in Ezekiel 28:13 and Revelation 21:19-21. It is difficult to properly identify all of these stones, since an accurate translation is not always possible. Some of the differences of translation are indicated in the following list...","summary_en":"STONES, Precious A lengthy list of the precious stones used in OT times occurs in Exodus 28:17-20 and 39:10-13, where four rows of three stones, each engraved with the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel, were set in the high priest’s breastplate. Other lists occur in Ezekiel 28:13 and Revelation 21:19-21. It is difficult to properly identify all of these stones, since an accurate translation is not always possible. Some of the differences of translation are indicated in the following list...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55040,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","summary_en":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82666,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","summary_en":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110292,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","summary_en":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137918,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:7<\/strong> The <em>jar of expensive perfume<\/em> was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","summary_en":"26:7 The jar of expensive perfume was a burial ointment (see Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56–24:1; John 12:1-7; 19:38-42) made of nard, which was harvested in India. The value of this jar of perfume was nearly a year’s wages (John 12:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":55041,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","summary_en":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82667,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","summary_en":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110293,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","summary_en":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137919,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:8<\/strong> <em>The disciples were indignant:<\/em> John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","summary_en":"26:8 The disciples were indignant: John 12:4 indicates that Judas Iscariot incited this reaction.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":55042,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","summary_en":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82668,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","summary_en":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110294,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","summary_en":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137920,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:12<\/strong> <em>to prepare my body for burial:<\/em> It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","summary_en":"26:12 to prepare my body for burial: It is not clear whether the woman fully understood the significance of her actions. In addition to preparation for burial, the anointing also speaks of Jesus as king (1 Sam 10:1; 2 Kgs 9:6) and priest (Exod 29:7).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":14528,"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}],"14":[{"id":42267,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69893,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97519,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125145,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7981,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covet, Covetousness*","title_en":"Covet, Covetousness*","content_ro":"<h3>COVET, COVETOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see <span>rsv<\/span>). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving a neighbor’s wife (Ex 20:17). The same word is used of Achan’s coveting of the spoils of Ai (Jos 7:21; cf. Mi 2:2). To covet is to desire inordinately, to place the object of desire before love and devotion to God.<\/p>\n<p>That idea is conveyed in the NT by a Greek word literally meaning “inordinate desire to have more.” The apostle Paul listed that kind of covetousness among earthly attitudes of which Christians are to rid themselves. “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Col 3:5, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Eph 5:3; 1 Cor 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Covetousness is pictured as a serious sin that leads to a variety of other sins. The love of money is the root of all evils (1 Tm 6:9-10; cf. Prv 15:27). It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-3; cf. 1 Sm 15:9, 19; Mt 26:14-15; 2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11). Jesus warned: “Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Lk 12:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Another Greek word translated “covet” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is better translated “earnestly desire” in a positive sense (1 Cor 14:39).<\/p>\n<p>The translators of the OT who produced the Septuagint used still another Greek word for the three Hebrew words rendered “covet” in English versions. In the NT the verb form of that word is used in both a positive and negative sense. It means “to desire or long for,” whether food (Lk 15:16), the divine mysteries (Mt 13:17; 1 Pt 1:12), some good thing (Phil 1:23; Heb 6:11), or some evil thing (Mt 5:28; 1 Thes 4:5; 1 Jn 2:17). The noun form of the same word generally reflects an attitude of disobedience to the law of God in which desire has given place to an evil impulse that results in sin (Jn 8:44; Rom 1:24; 6:12; 7:7-8; 13:14; Gal 5:16, 26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVET, COVETOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see <span>rsv<\/span>). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving a neighbor’s wife (Ex 20:17). The same word is used of Achan’s coveting of the spoils of Ai (Jos 7:21; cf. Mi 2:2). To covet is to desire inordinately, to place the object of desire before love and devotion to God.<\/p>\n<p>That idea is conveyed in the NT by a Greek word literally meaning “inordinate desire to have more.” The apostle Paul listed that kind of covetousness among earthly attitudes of which Christians are to rid themselves. “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Col 3:5, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Eph 5:3; 1 Cor 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Covetousness is pictured as a serious sin that leads to a variety of other sins. The love of money is the root of all evils (1 Tm 6:9-10; cf. Prv 15:27). It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-3; cf. 1 Sm 15:9, 19; Mt 26:14-15; 2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11). Jesus warned: “Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Lk 12:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Another Greek word translated “covet” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is better translated “earnestly desire” in a positive sense (1 Cor 14:39).<\/p>\n<p>The translators of the OT who produced the Septuagint used still another Greek word for the three Hebrew words rendered “covet” in English versions. In the NT the verb form of that word is used in both a positive and negative sense. It means “to desire or long for,” whether food (Lk 15:16), the divine mysteries (Mt 13:17; 1 Pt 1:12), some good thing (Phil 1:23; Heb 6:11), or some evil thing (Mt 5:28; 1 Thes 4:5; 1 Jn 2:17). The noun form of the same word generally reflects an attitude of disobedience to the law of God in which desire has given place to an evil impulse that results in sin (Jn 8:44; Rom 1:24; 6:12; 7:7-8; 13:14; Gal 5:16, 26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVET, COVETOUSNESS* The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see rsv). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving ...","summary_en":"COVET, COVETOUSNESS* The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see rsv). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21120,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judas","title_en":"Judas","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his betrayal of Jesus.<\/li>\n<p>Judas Iscariot’s name appears last in the list of disciples (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16), perhaps indicating his ignominy in the minds of later believers rather than his original importance among the Twelve. During Jesus’ public ministry, he managed the treasury of the group (Jn 13:29), from which he was known to pilfer money (12:6). As a betrayer, Judas contracted to turn Jesus over to the chief priests for 30 pieces of silver. He accomplished this act of treachery by singling out Jesus with a kiss in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:14-47; Mk 14:10-46; Lk 22:3-48; Jn 18:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>Various suggestions have been offered to explain Judas’s traitorous deed. (1) In keeping with his patriotic zeal, Judas turned Jesus over to the authorities after realizing that his Master did not intend to overthrow the Roman order and establish a Jewish state. (2) Judas believed Jesus to be the Messiah and planned his arrest in hope of urging Jesus to usher in his kingdom. (3) He was a scoundrel who had plotted wickedness since the start of Jesus’ public ministry. (4) Prompted by a satanic impulse, Judas betrayed Jesus; however, after recognizing that he was deceived, out of remorse he took his own life. (5) With damaged pride and humiliated ego from Jesus’ caustic rebukes, Judas, originally a loyal disciple, turned against him. (6) Judas, moved by his own greed, yielded to his selfish instincts, not realizing that Jesus would consequently be tried and killed; upon learning the outcome of his betrayal, he repented in despair and committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Judas, despondent over his act of betrayal, went out and hung himself in a field bought with his 30 pieces of silver (Mt 27:3-10). Acts 1:18 gruesomely adds that his body burst open, spilling out his intestines; for this reason the field was called the “Field of Blood” (Acts 1:19). Matthias later took Judas Iscariot’s place among the Twelve (v 26).<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Joseph and Mary, and the brother of Jesus, James, Joseph, and Simon (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Evidently Judas and his brothers rejected Jesus as Messiah (Jn 7:5) until after his resurrection (Acts 1:14). Later, it is thought, Judas (English “Jude”) authored the epistle named Jude.<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of James and one of the 12 disciples (Lk 6:16; Jn 14:22; Acts 1:13). He is identifiable with Thaddeus in Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18. <em>See<\/em> Thaddaeus, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>4. Galilean who led a Jewish revolt against the Romans because of the census taken by Quirinius in <span>AD<\/span> 6. In Acts 5:37 the Pharisee Gamaliel mentioned Judas as an example of one who unsuccessfully tried to gain the support of the Jewish people. Josephus credited him with founding the Jewish Zealot party, an extreme revolutionary movement that attempted to throw off Roman rule and to reestablish Jewish autonomy (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Owner of a house along the street called Straight in Damascus. Here, following his conversion, Saul (Paul) found lodging and had his vision restored by Ananias (Acts 9:11).<\/li>\n<li>6. Prophet and leader in the early Jerusalem church. Judas, surnamed Barsabbas, was selected with Silas to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, where they confirmed the Jerusalem Council’s decision regarding the gentile church and subsequently encouraged its believers (Acts 15:22-32). <em>See<\/em> Joseph #12.<\/li>\n<li>7. KJV spelling of Judah, Jacob’s son (Mt 1:2-3). <em>See<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his betrayal of Jesus.<\/li>\n<p>Judas Iscariot’s name appears last in the list of disciples (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16), perhaps indicating his ignominy in the minds of later believers rather than his original importance among the Twelve. During Jesus’ public ministry, he managed the treasury of the group (Jn 13:29), from which he was known to pilfer money (12:6). As a betrayer, Judas contracted to turn Jesus over to the chief priests for 30 pieces of silver. He accomplished this act of treachery by singling out Jesus with a kiss in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:14-47; Mk 14:10-46; Lk 22:3-48; Jn 18:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>Various suggestions have been offered to explain Judas’s traitorous deed. (1) In keeping with his patriotic zeal, Judas turned Jesus over to the authorities after realizing that his Master did not intend to overthrow the Roman order and establish a Jewish state. (2) Judas believed Jesus to be the Messiah and planned his arrest in hope of urging Jesus to usher in his kingdom. (3) He was a scoundrel who had plotted wickedness since the start of Jesus’ public ministry. (4) Prompted by a satanic impulse, Judas betrayed Jesus; however, after recognizing that he was deceived, out of remorse he took his own life. (5) With damaged pride and humiliated ego from Jesus’ caustic rebukes, Judas, originally a loyal disciple, turned against him. (6) Judas, moved by his own greed, yielded to his selfish instincts, not realizing that Jesus would consequently be tried and killed; upon learning the outcome of his betrayal, he repented in despair and committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Judas, despondent over his act of betrayal, went out and hung himself in a field bought with his 30 pieces of silver (Mt 27:3-10). Acts 1:18 gruesomely adds that his body burst open, spilling out his intestines; for this reason the field was called the “Field of Blood” (Acts 1:19). Matthias later took Judas Iscariot’s place among the Twelve (v 26).<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Joseph and Mary, and the brother of Jesus, James, Joseph, and Simon (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Evidently Judas and his brothers rejected Jesus as Messiah (Jn 7:5) until after his resurrection (Acts 1:14). Later, it is thought, Judas (English “Jude”) authored the epistle named Jude.<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of James and one of the 12 disciples (Lk 6:16; Jn 14:22; Acts 1:13). He is identifiable with Thaddeus in Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18. <em>See<\/em> Thaddaeus, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>4. Galilean who led a Jewish revolt against the Romans because of the census taken by Quirinius in <span>AD<\/span> 6. In Acts 5:37 the Pharisee Gamaliel mentioned Judas as an example of one who unsuccessfully tried to gain the support of the Jewish people. Josephus credited him with founding the Jewish Zealot party, an extreme revolutionary movement that attempted to throw off Roman rule and to reestablish Jewish autonomy (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Owner of a house along the street called Straight in Damascus. Here, following his conversion, Saul (Paul) found lodging and had his vision restored by Ananias (Acts 9:11).<\/li>\n<li>6. Prophet and leader in the early Jerusalem church. Judas, surnamed Barsabbas, was selected with Silas to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, where they confirmed the Jerusalem Council’s decision regarding the gentile church and subsequently encouraged its believers (Acts 15:22-32). <em>See<\/em> Joseph #12.<\/li>\n<li>7. KJV spelling of Judah, Jacob’s son (Mt 1:2-3). <em>See<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JUDAS 1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his...","summary_en":"JUDAS 1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24832,"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":39686,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","title_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","content_ro":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","summary_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55043,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","summary_en":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82669,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","summary_en":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110295,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","summary_en":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137921,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:14-16<\/strong> Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","summary_en":"26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":6616,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Church Meetings","title_en":"Church Meetings","content_ro":"<h3>CHURCH MEETINGS<\/h3>\n<p>The assembling together of the believers. In the NT, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> (usually translated “church”) is used primarily in two ways: (1) to describe a meeting or an assembly, and (2) to designate the people who participate in such assembling together—whether they are actually assembled or not. The NT contains a few places that speak of a secular Greek assembly (Acts 19:32, 41); every other instance speaks of a Christian assembly. Sometimes the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is used to designate the actual meeting together of Christians. This is certainly what Paul intended in 1 Corinthians 14:19, 28, and 35, in that the expression <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">en ekklesia<\/span> must mean “in a meeting” and not “in the church.” To translate this phrase “in the church” (as is done in most modern English versions) is misleading, for most readers will think it means “in the church building.” The NT never once names the place of assembly a “church.” Aside from the few instances where the word clearly means the actual meeting together of believers, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> most often is used as a descriptor for the believers who constitute a local church (such as the church in Corinth, the church in Philippi, and the church in Colosse) or all the believers (past, present, and future) who constitute the universal church, the complete body of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>When reading the NT, Christians need to be aware of the various ways in which the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> (“church”) is used. On the most basic level, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is any gathering of believers. On another level, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is an organized local entity—comprised of all the believers in any given locality, under one pluralistic eldership. On another level, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is the universal church whose constituents are all the believers who have ever been, are now existing, and will ever be. The word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> was used by the NT writers with these various aspects of meaning, though, at times, it is not possible to differentiate one from the other. Nevertheless, students of the NT could avoid some confusion if they used discrimination in their exegesis of the text. Some interpreters have taught that the smallest unit of the church is the local church, but the NT writers sometimes used the word “church” to indicate a small home gathering. Other interpreters confuse the local church with the universal church. But some things in the NT are addressed to a local church that do not necessarily apply to the whole church, and some great things are spoken of the universal church that could never be attained by any particular local group. The things Paul said about the church in the Epistle to the Ephesians (which was written as an encyclical for several churches and not just for the church in Ephesus) could never be attained by a local church. For example, what local church could attain to the fullness of the stature of Christ?<\/p>\n<p>There is much to be said about how interpreters have confused the local church with the universal church, but this article is devoted to clearing up the confusion about what constitutes the smallest unit of the church—the local church, or what could be called the house church or home gathering.<\/p>\n<p>The NT seems to present the fact that a particular local church (i.e., a church comprising all the believers in a given locality under one eldership) could and did have several <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span>—“meetings” or “assemblies” (carried on in homes of the local Christians). Thus, the smallest unit to comprise a “church” was one of these home meetings. However, there is no indication in the NT that each of these home meetings had its own eldership or was a distinct entity separate from the other gatherings <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span><em>)<\/em> in the same locality. According to Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5, elders were appointed for every local church (compare the expressions “appointed elders in every church” and “appoint elders in every city”)—not for every house church. Nevertheless, it appears that every local church of some size had several such <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span> (“meetings”) going on within that locality.<\/p>\n<p>The church in Jerusalem must have had several home meetings (see Acts 2:46; 5:42; 8:3; 12:5, 12), as did the church in Rome (see Rom 16:3-5, 14-15 and comments below). A small local church may have had only one home gathering—as was probably the case with the church at Colosse (see Phlm 1:2 and comments below), but this would have been impossible for large local churches like those in Jerusalem, Rome, and Ephesus, in which there must have been several “house churches” (see 1 Cor 16:19-20 [1 Cor was written from Ephesus] and comments below). An examination of the passages that deal with the issue of the “house church” should affirm this. These passages are Romans 16:3-5, 14-15; 1 Corinthians 16:19-20; Colossians 4:15-16; and Philemon 1:1-2 (all quoted from the <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h4>Romans 16:3-5, 14-15<\/h4>\n<p>In the last chapter of Romans, Paul asked the believers in Rome, to whom he had written this epistle, to greet Priscilla and Aquila and the church that met in their home (16:3-5). The entire church in Rome could not have met in Priscilla and Aquila’s home, for the church was much too large to have assembled in a single home. Rather, the church in Priscilla and Aquila’s home must have been one among several such “house churches” in Rome. The following discussion should substantiate this position.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s Epistle to the Romans was addressed to “all God’s beloved in Rome” (1:7), not to “the church in Rome.” At the time of writing, Paul had not been to Rome—nor had any other apostle. The church was probably started there by Jewish Romans who had been converted during their visit to Jerusalem during Pentecost (Acts 2:10) and then returned to Rome. Since the church had not been started by an apostle, it could have been that there were no “ordained” elders in the church at Rome and that there were several gatherings of believers in various parts of Rome and its suburbs. Paul knew some of the saints in Rome (whom he addressed by name in the last chapter) and thus addressed an epistle to all the saints in that locality, instead of to the church in that locality—which was his usual practice (see 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 1 Thes 1:1; 2 Thes 1:1). Nonetheless, “all the saints in Rome” would comprise “the church in Rome” (cf. Phil 1:1, in which Paul addressed his epistle to all the saints in Philippi).<\/p>\n<p>In the final chapter of Romans, Paul asks all the believers in Rome (which equals the “local” church in Rome) to greet the church in Priscilla and Aquila’s house. Later in the chapter, Paul asks the church to greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the brothers with them; and then again he asks the church to greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, Olympas, and all the saints with them (16:14-15). Evidently, Paul was identifying two other groups of believers who must have met together. (And perhaps Paul was referring to two more groups in 16:10-11, which in the Greek could mean the ones of Aristobulus’s and Narcissus’s <em>households<\/em> or the ones of their <em>fellowships.<\/em>) It seems that the church in Rome, like the church in Jerusalem and Ephesus, had several home <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span> (meetings).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Romans was written around <span>AD<\/span> 58. The Neronian persecution began around <span>AD<\/span> 64. Secular historians such as Tacitus tell us that a vast multitude <em>(ingens multitudo)<\/em> of Christians were tortured and killed during this persecution (<em>Annals<\/em> 15.44). Seutonius (in his book <em>Nero,<\/em> ch 16) said that the rapid increase of the Christians in Rome had made them unpopular. Indeed, at the time Paul penned the Epistle to the Romans he said their faith was known throughout the world (1:8), which indicates that the church in Rome had already made an impact on the Mediterranean world. When Paul came to Rome three years later (<span>AD<\/span> 61), he came to a city that had a large church there already. From Romans 15:23, we know that the church had been in existence for many years even before Paul wrote his epistle to them. In short, the church in Rome was a large church around the time Paul wrote his epistle to them. The entire church could not have met in the home of Aquila and Priscilla, who would have had only a modest-sized dwelling (for they were tentmakers). Besides, Paul greeted over 25 individuals by name in chapter 16—and he had not yet even been to Rome!<\/p>\n<p>There must have been several <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span> in Rome, i.e., several home churches all unified as the one local church in Rome. For example, the Christians in Rome apparently worshiped in numerous homes such as Priscilla and Aquila’s. Other churches in homes are mentioned in Colossians 4:15 and Philemon 1:2. Groups of Christians met in houses of prominent believers or in other available rooms (cf. Mt 26:16; Acts 12:12; 1 Cor 16:19; Col 4:15; Phlm 1:2). The church in Priscilla and Aquila’s house is the first of five groups of believers in Paul’s list, but the only one referred to definitely as a church (see Rom 16:5, 10-11, 14-15). Priscilla and Aquila opened their home for Christian meetings. The church mentioned there was obviously only a part of the total number of Christians in Rome. Verses 10-11 and 14-15 seem to refer to two other household churches in Rome. Apparently, there were at least three churches there, and probably more. Each house church could not have been a separate entity with a separate church government; rather, each house church must have been simply one home meeting of some of the saints in the one local church at Rome.<\/p>\n<h4>1 Corinthians 16:19-20<\/h4>\n<p>In this passage we again see Aquila and Priscilla and again discover that a church met in their house. According to Romans, their house church was, of course, in Rome. According to 1 Corinthians (written from Ephesus), their house church was in Ephesus. Many scholars think Aquila and Priscilla left Rome around <span>AD<\/span> 49 at the time of Claudius’s edict expelling Jews from Rome. They very well could have already been Christians at this time. According to Acts 18, they joined Paul in Corinth (where they all worked together in their craft of tentmaking) and then went on with him to Ephesus, during the time (around <span>AD<\/span> 51) the church in Ephesus was first established. Paul continued on with his second missionary journey, while Aquila and Priscilla remained in Ephesus. No doubt, the early church there first met in their home. Paul returned to Ephesus a few years later and remained there for two years (around <span>AD<\/span> 53–54). During this time, Paul’s proclamation of the gospel went out from Ephesus (as a center) to all of Asia Minor (see Acts 19:8-10). As this was going on, the church in Ephesus grew (see vv 18-20).<\/p>\n<p>It was during these years that Paul wrote to the Corinthians, in which he sent greetings from the churches in Asia, from Aquila and Priscilla—and the church in their house, and from all the brothers (1 Cor 16:19-20). In giving this kind of greeting, it seems that Paul was sending greetings from (1) all the churches in Asia Minor, (2) the church in Ephesus (equivalent to “all the brothers”), and (3) those believers who gathered with Aquila and Priscilla in their home. It would be hard to imagine that all the saints in Ephesus met at Aquila and Priscilla’s home. The church probably began that way, but as it grew, so did the number of home meetings. From other portions of the NT (specifically 1 Timothy, which was written around <span>AD<\/span> 64 by Paul to Timothy while Timothy was leading the church in Ephesus), we discover that there must have been several home meetings in Ephesus because there were so many saints there (see 1 Timothy 5–6, which reveal that there must have been a large number of saints in Ephesus—young men, young women, older men, widows, and so forth). At any rate, several saints must have hosted an <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span><em>,<\/em> a meeting, in their home. (Aquila and Priscilla left Ephesus around <span>AD<\/span> 56\/57 and returned to Rome, where again they hosted a church in their home. Others in Ephesus would have to open their homes.) But each such <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> did not have its own eldership; rather, all of the church in Ephesus was under one eldership—headed up by Timothy, Paul’s coworker.<\/p>\n<h4>Colossians 4:15-16<\/h4>\n<p>In this portion, we again read about a church existing in the home of one called Nymphas. In his final remarks to the church in Colosse, Paul asked the saints in Colosse to send his greetings to (1) the brothers that are in Laodicea, (2) Nymphas in particular, and (3) the church in Nymphas’s house. According to the structure of Colossians 4:15, it seems evident that the first greeting included all the believers in Laodicea (a neighboring church to Colosse), who would comprise the entire church in Laodicea (called “the church of the Laodiceans” in Col 4:16), and that the second and third greetings were to a specific individual (Nymphas) in the church in Laodicea and a church meeting in Nymphas’s house. This church meeting in Nymphas’s house would probably be one of several home meetings—all part of the one local church in Laodicea.<\/p>\n<p>There is a textual problem in this passage that could have some effect on the interpretation of it. Some manuscripts read “his house”; others read “her house”; still others read “their house.” Because it cannot be determined from the Greek text whether Nymphas was male or female, various scribes used different pronouns before “house.” Between the readings “her” and “his,” it is far more likely that the pronoun “her” was changed to “his” than vice versa. Some scholars say that “their” refers to “the brothers” at Laodicea. But that does not make sense if we understand that “the brothers in Laodicea” is equal to the church in Laodicea. How could the church in Laodicea have the church in their house? Other scholars indicate that the Greek word for “their” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">auton<\/span><em>)<\/em> refers to the ones with Nymphas—i.e., the members of his household. Whether the reading was “her house” or “their house,” a particular group of believers within the church of Laodicea met there. Their meeting could legitimately be called an <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span>—an assembling together.<\/p>\n<h4>Philemon 1:1-2<\/h4>\n<p>This is the last time in the NT we read about a church in a particular home. Paul wrote a short epistle to Philemon, an elder of the church in Colosse, on behalf of Onesimus, Philemon’s runaway slave converted by Paul to Christ. In his introduction to this short epistle, Paul sends his greetings to Philemon, Apphia, Archippus, and the church in Philemon’s house. It is important to note that Paul did not send greetings to all the saints in Colosse and then to the church in Philemon’s house (as is the pattern in 1 Cor 16:19-20 and Col 4:15); instead, he just sent greetings to Philemon and to the church in his house. Therefore, we can assume that the entire church in Colosse must have met at Philemon’s house.<\/p>\n<h4>Worship in the Home Meetings and Church Meetings<\/h4>\n<p>When the church first began in Jerusalem, the believers met in homes for fellowship and worship. Acts 2:42-47 tells us that the early Christians met in homes to hear the apostles’ teachings and to celebrate Communion (which is called “the breaking of bread”). During such gatherings, the Christians often shared meals with one another in what was called a love feast (2 Pt 2:13; Jude 1:12). At these meetings, the Christians recited Scripture, sang hymns and psalms, and joyfully praised the Lord (see Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16-17). Christians also gathered together in homes to pray (Acts 12:12) and read the Word.<\/p>\n<p>Small groups of believers met in homes for worship quite regularly; in a city where there were several such <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span><em>,<\/em> all the believers would gather together for special occasions. Scripture tells us that all the believers would come together to hear an epistle from the apostles read out loud (see Acts 15:30; Col 4:16), and we can surmise from the NT record that all the Christians in a city met together once a week on Sunday, which was called the Lord’s Day. First Corinthians provides several insights about how the early Christians worshiped together when all the believers in one city met together. We know that 1 Corinthians pertains to this larger gathering because in 11:20 Paul spoke of all the believers coming together in one place and in 14:23 he spoke of the whole church coming together in one place.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used this epistle to correct the Corinthians’ behavior in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:17-34) and in the exercising of spiritual gifts during church meetings (ch 14). Paul’s adjustments reveal his perceptions of a model Christian meeting, and his preceptions were probably developed from actual experience in other church meetings. Paul urged the Corinthians to celebrate the Lord’s Supper together in a manner that reflected Jesus’ institution of that meal. They were to remember the Lord and his death for them, and they were to partake of the bread and wine with all seriousness. At the same time, they were to be conscious of the fact that they were members of the same body of Christ—joined to one another, and also to Christ.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul’s presentation in chapter 14, this “body consciousness” should be evident in the way the believers worshiped together. One’s personal experience and liberty should not hinder the coordination of the body in worshiping God corporately. Thus, when the believers exercised their spiritual gifts—whether it be prophesying, speaking in tongues, providing interpretations of the tongues, or teaching—it should be done in good order and for the edification of the congregation, not personal edification. When all the church assembled together to worship God, it should be a display of spiritual unity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Church.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHURCH MEETINGS<\/h3>\n<p>The assembling together of the believers. In the NT, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> (usually translated “church”) is used primarily in two ways: (1) to describe a meeting or an assembly, and (2) to designate the people who participate in such assembling together—whether they are actually assembled or not. The NT contains a few places that speak of a secular Greek assembly (Acts 19:32, 41); every other instance speaks of a Christian assembly. Sometimes the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is used to designate the actual meeting together of Christians. This is certainly what Paul intended in 1 Corinthians 14:19, 28, and 35, in that the expression <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">en ekklesia<\/span> must mean “in a meeting” and not “in the church.” To translate this phrase “in the church” (as is done in most modern English versions) is misleading, for most readers will think it means “in the church building.” The NT never once names the place of assembly a “church.” Aside from the few instances where the word clearly means the actual meeting together of believers, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> most often is used as a descriptor for the believers who constitute a local church (such as the church in Corinth, the church in Philippi, and the church in Colosse) or all the believers (past, present, and future) who constitute the universal church, the complete body of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>When reading the NT, Christians need to be aware of the various ways in which the word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> (“church”) is used. On the most basic level, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is any gathering of believers. On another level, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is an organized local entity—comprised of all the believers in any given locality, under one pluralistic eldership. On another level, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> is the universal church whose constituents are all the believers who have ever been, are now existing, and will ever be. The word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> was used by the NT writers with these various aspects of meaning, though, at times, it is not possible to differentiate one from the other. Nevertheless, students of the NT could avoid some confusion if they used discrimination in their exegesis of the text. Some interpreters have taught that the smallest unit of the church is the local church, but the NT writers sometimes used the word “church” to indicate a small home gathering. Other interpreters confuse the local church with the universal church. But some things in the NT are addressed to a local church that do not necessarily apply to the whole church, and some great things are spoken of the universal church that could never be attained by any particular local group. The things Paul said about the church in the Epistle to the Ephesians (which was written as an encyclical for several churches and not just for the church in Ephesus) could never be attained by a local church. For example, what local church could attain to the fullness of the stature of Christ?<\/p>\n<p>There is much to be said about how interpreters have confused the local church with the universal church, but this article is devoted to clearing up the confusion about what constitutes the smallest unit of the church—the local church, or what could be called the house church or home gathering.<\/p>\n<p>The NT seems to present the fact that a particular local church (i.e., a church comprising all the believers in a given locality under one eldership) could and did have several <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span>—“meetings” or “assemblies” (carried on in homes of the local Christians). Thus, the smallest unit to comprise a “church” was one of these home meetings. However, there is no indication in the NT that each of these home meetings had its own eldership or was a distinct entity separate from the other gatherings <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span><em>)<\/em> in the same locality. According to Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5, elders were appointed for every local church (compare the expressions “appointed elders in every church” and “appoint elders in every city”)—not for every house church. Nevertheless, it appears that every local church of some size had several such <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span> (“meetings”) going on within that locality.<\/p>\n<p>The church in Jerusalem must have had several home meetings (see Acts 2:46; 5:42; 8:3; 12:5, 12), as did the church in Rome (see Rom 16:3-5, 14-15 and comments below). A small local church may have had only one home gathering—as was probably the case with the church at Colosse (see Phlm 1:2 and comments below), but this would have been impossible for large local churches like those in Jerusalem, Rome, and Ephesus, in which there must have been several “house churches” (see 1 Cor 16:19-20 [1 Cor was written from Ephesus] and comments below). An examination of the passages that deal with the issue of the “house church” should affirm this. These passages are Romans 16:3-5, 14-15; 1 Corinthians 16:19-20; Colossians 4:15-16; and Philemon 1:1-2 (all quoted from the <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h4>Romans 16:3-5, 14-15<\/h4>\n<p>In the last chapter of Romans, Paul asked the believers in Rome, to whom he had written this epistle, to greet Priscilla and Aquila and the church that met in their home (16:3-5). The entire church in Rome could not have met in Priscilla and Aquila’s home, for the church was much too large to have assembled in a single home. Rather, the church in Priscilla and Aquila’s home must have been one among several such “house churches” in Rome. The following discussion should substantiate this position.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s Epistle to the Romans was addressed to “all God’s beloved in Rome” (1:7), not to “the church in Rome.” At the time of writing, Paul had not been to Rome—nor had any other apostle. The church was probably started there by Jewish Romans who had been converted during their visit to Jerusalem during Pentecost (Acts 2:10) and then returned to Rome. Since the church had not been started by an apostle, it could have been that there were no “ordained” elders in the church at Rome and that there were several gatherings of believers in various parts of Rome and its suburbs. Paul knew some of the saints in Rome (whom he addressed by name in the last chapter) and thus addressed an epistle to all the saints in that locality, instead of to the church in that locality—which was his usual practice (see 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 1 Thes 1:1; 2 Thes 1:1). Nonetheless, “all the saints in Rome” would comprise “the church in Rome” (cf. Phil 1:1, in which Paul addressed his epistle to all the saints in Philippi).<\/p>\n<p>In the final chapter of Romans, Paul asks all the believers in Rome (which equals the “local” church in Rome) to greet the church in Priscilla and Aquila’s house. Later in the chapter, Paul asks the church to greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the brothers with them; and then again he asks the church to greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, Olympas, and all the saints with them (16:14-15). Evidently, Paul was identifying two other groups of believers who must have met together. (And perhaps Paul was referring to two more groups in 16:10-11, which in the Greek could mean the ones of Aristobulus’s and Narcissus’s <em>households<\/em> or the ones of their <em>fellowships.<\/em>) It seems that the church in Rome, like the church in Jerusalem and Ephesus, had several home <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span> (meetings).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Romans was written around <span>AD<\/span> 58. The Neronian persecution began around <span>AD<\/span> 64. Secular historians such as Tacitus tell us that a vast multitude <em>(ingens multitudo)<\/em> of Christians were tortured and killed during this persecution (<em>Annals<\/em> 15.44). Seutonius (in his book <em>Nero,<\/em> ch 16) said that the rapid increase of the Christians in Rome had made them unpopular. Indeed, at the time Paul penned the Epistle to the Romans he said their faith was known throughout the world (1:8), which indicates that the church in Rome had already made an impact on the Mediterranean world. When Paul came to Rome three years later (<span>AD<\/span> 61), he came to a city that had a large church there already. From Romans 15:23, we know that the church had been in existence for many years even before Paul wrote his epistle to them. In short, the church in Rome was a large church around the time Paul wrote his epistle to them. The entire church could not have met in the home of Aquila and Priscilla, who would have had only a modest-sized dwelling (for they were tentmakers). Besides, Paul greeted over 25 individuals by name in chapter 16—and he had not yet even been to Rome!<\/p>\n<p>There must have been several <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span> in Rome, i.e., several home churches all unified as the one local church in Rome. For example, the Christians in Rome apparently worshiped in numerous homes such as Priscilla and Aquila’s. Other churches in homes are mentioned in Colossians 4:15 and Philemon 1:2. Groups of Christians met in houses of prominent believers or in other available rooms (cf. Mt 26:16; Acts 12:12; 1 Cor 16:19; Col 4:15; Phlm 1:2). The church in Priscilla and Aquila’s house is the first of five groups of believers in Paul’s list, but the only one referred to definitely as a church (see Rom 16:5, 10-11, 14-15). Priscilla and Aquila opened their home for Christian meetings. The church mentioned there was obviously only a part of the total number of Christians in Rome. Verses 10-11 and 14-15 seem to refer to two other household churches in Rome. Apparently, there were at least three churches there, and probably more. Each house church could not have been a separate entity with a separate church government; rather, each house church must have been simply one home meeting of some of the saints in the one local church at Rome.<\/p>\n<h4>1 Corinthians 16:19-20<\/h4>\n<p>In this passage we again see Aquila and Priscilla and again discover that a church met in their house. According to Romans, their house church was, of course, in Rome. According to 1 Corinthians (written from Ephesus), their house church was in Ephesus. Many scholars think Aquila and Priscilla left Rome around <span>AD<\/span> 49 at the time of Claudius’s edict expelling Jews from Rome. They very well could have already been Christians at this time. According to Acts 18, they joined Paul in Corinth (where they all worked together in their craft of tentmaking) and then went on with him to Ephesus, during the time (around <span>AD<\/span> 51) the church in Ephesus was first established. Paul continued on with his second missionary journey, while Aquila and Priscilla remained in Ephesus. No doubt, the early church there first met in their home. Paul returned to Ephesus a few years later and remained there for two years (around <span>AD<\/span> 53–54). During this time, Paul’s proclamation of the gospel went out from Ephesus (as a center) to all of Asia Minor (see Acts 19:8-10). As this was going on, the church in Ephesus grew (see vv 18-20).<\/p>\n<p>It was during these years that Paul wrote to the Corinthians, in which he sent greetings from the churches in Asia, from Aquila and Priscilla—and the church in their house, and from all the brothers (1 Cor 16:19-20). In giving this kind of greeting, it seems that Paul was sending greetings from (1) all the churches in Asia Minor, (2) the church in Ephesus (equivalent to “all the brothers”), and (3) those believers who gathered with Aquila and Priscilla in their home. It would be hard to imagine that all the saints in Ephesus met at Aquila and Priscilla’s home. The church probably began that way, but as it grew, so did the number of home meetings. From other portions of the NT (specifically 1 Timothy, which was written around <span>AD<\/span> 64 by Paul to Timothy while Timothy was leading the church in Ephesus), we discover that there must have been several home meetings in Ephesus because there were so many saints there (see 1 Timothy 5–6, which reveal that there must have been a large number of saints in Ephesus—young men, young women, older men, widows, and so forth). At any rate, several saints must have hosted an <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span><em>,<\/em> a meeting, in their home. (Aquila and Priscilla left Ephesus around <span>AD<\/span> 56\/57 and returned to Rome, where again they hosted a church in their home. Others in Ephesus would have to open their homes.) But each such <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span> did not have its own eldership; rather, all of the church in Ephesus was under one eldership—headed up by Timothy, Paul’s coworker.<\/p>\n<h4>Colossians 4:15-16<\/h4>\n<p>In this portion, we again read about a church existing in the home of one called Nymphas. In his final remarks to the church in Colosse, Paul asked the saints in Colosse to send his greetings to (1) the brothers that are in Laodicea, (2) Nymphas in particular, and (3) the church in Nymphas’s house. According to the structure of Colossians 4:15, it seems evident that the first greeting included all the believers in Laodicea (a neighboring church to Colosse), who would comprise the entire church in Laodicea (called “the church of the Laodiceans” in Col 4:16), and that the second and third greetings were to a specific individual (Nymphas) in the church in Laodicea and a church meeting in Nymphas’s house. This church meeting in Nymphas’s house would probably be one of several home meetings—all part of the one local church in Laodicea.<\/p>\n<p>There is a textual problem in this passage that could have some effect on the interpretation of it. Some manuscripts read “his house”; others read “her house”; still others read “their house.” Because it cannot be determined from the Greek text whether Nymphas was male or female, various scribes used different pronouns before “house.” Between the readings “her” and “his,” it is far more likely that the pronoun “her” was changed to “his” than vice versa. Some scholars say that “their” refers to “the brothers” at Laodicea. But that does not make sense if we understand that “the brothers in Laodicea” is equal to the church in Laodicea. How could the church in Laodicea have the church in their house? Other scholars indicate that the Greek word for “their” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">auton<\/span><em>)<\/em> refers to the ones with Nymphas—i.e., the members of his household. Whether the reading was “her house” or “their house,” a particular group of believers within the church of Laodicea met there. Their meeting could legitimately be called an <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesia<\/span>—an assembling together.<\/p>\n<h4>Philemon 1:1-2<\/h4>\n<p>This is the last time in the NT we read about a church in a particular home. Paul wrote a short epistle to Philemon, an elder of the church in Colosse, on behalf of Onesimus, Philemon’s runaway slave converted by Paul to Christ. In his introduction to this short epistle, Paul sends his greetings to Philemon, Apphia, Archippus, and the church in Philemon’s house. It is important to note that Paul did not send greetings to all the saints in Colosse and then to the church in Philemon’s house (as is the pattern in 1 Cor 16:19-20 and Col 4:15); instead, he just sent greetings to Philemon and to the church in his house. Therefore, we can assume that the entire church in Colosse must have met at Philemon’s house.<\/p>\n<h4>Worship in the Home Meetings and Church Meetings<\/h4>\n<p>When the church first began in Jerusalem, the believers met in homes for fellowship and worship. Acts 2:42-47 tells us that the early Christians met in homes to hear the apostles’ teachings and to celebrate Communion (which is called “the breaking of bread”). During such gatherings, the Christians often shared meals with one another in what was called a love feast (2 Pt 2:13; Jude 1:12). At these meetings, the Christians recited Scripture, sang hymns and psalms, and joyfully praised the Lord (see Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16-17). Christians also gathered together in homes to pray (Acts 12:12) and read the Word.<\/p>\n<p>Small groups of believers met in homes for worship quite regularly; in a city where there were several such <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ekklesiai<\/span><em>,<\/em> all the believers would gather together for special occasions. Scripture tells us that all the believers would come together to hear an epistle from the apostles read out loud (see Acts 15:30; Col 4:16), and we can surmise from the NT record that all the Christians in a city met together once a week on Sunday, which was called the Lord’s Day. First Corinthians provides several insights about how the early Christians worshiped together when all the believers in one city met together. We know that 1 Corinthians pertains to this larger gathering because in 11:20 Paul spoke of all the believers coming together in one place and in 14:23 he spoke of the whole church coming together in one place.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used this epistle to correct the Corinthians’ behavior in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:17-34) and in the exercising of spiritual gifts during church meetings (ch 14). Paul’s adjustments reveal his perceptions of a model Christian meeting, and his preceptions were probably developed from actual experience in other church meetings. Paul urged the Corinthians to celebrate the Lord’s Supper together in a manner that reflected Jesus’ institution of that meal. They were to remember the Lord and his death for them, and they were to partake of the bread and wine with all seriousness. At the same time, they were to be conscious of the fact that they were members of the same body of Christ—joined to one another, and also to Christ.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul’s presentation in chapter 14, this “body consciousness” should be evident in the way the believers worshiped together. One’s personal experience and liberty should not hinder the coordination of the body in worshiping God corporately. Thus, when the believers exercised their spiritual gifts—whether it be prophesying, speaking in tongues, providing interpretations of the tongues, or teaching—it should be done in good order and for the edification of the congregation, not personal edification. When all the church assembled together to worship God, it should be a display of spiritual unity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHURCH MEETINGS The assembling together of the believers. In the NT, the Greek word ekklesia (usually translated “church”) is used primarily in two ways: (1) to describe a meeting or an assembly, and (2) to designate the people who participate in such assembling together—whether they are actually assembled or not. The NT contains a few places that speak of a secular Greek assembly (Acts 19:32, 41); every other instance speaks of a Christian assembly. Sometimes the word ekklesia is used to des...","summary_en":"CHURCH MEETINGS The assembling together of the believers. In the NT, the Greek word ekklesia (usually translated “church”) is used primarily in two ways: (1) to describe a meeting or an assembly, and (2) to designate the people who participate in such assembling together—whether they are actually assembled or not. The NT contains a few places that speak of a secular Greek assembly (Acts 19:32, 41); every other instance speaks of a Christian assembly. Sometimes the word ekklesia is used to des...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":23485,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24834,"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":60336,"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":65645,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66103,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87962,"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":93271,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93729,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115588,"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":120897,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121355,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143214,"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":148523,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148981,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\n<p>At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\n<p>However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":55044,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","summary_en":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82670,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","summary_en":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110296,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","summary_en":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137922,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:18<\/strong> <em>My time:<\/em> The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","summary_en":"26:18 My time: The Messiah would now complete the work for which he was commissioned, to die for the sins of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":6476,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":4208,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disciple*, Beloved","title_en":"Disciple*, Beloved","content_ro":"<h3>BELOVED DISCIPLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved, reporting that Jesus’ body was missing from the tomb (20:2). (4) The disciple whom Jesus loved was in a fishing boat with Peter and the other disciples and recognized Jesus standing on the shore (21:7). (5) The disciple whom Jesus loved was following Jesus by the lakeshore, and the author reminded his readers that this was the same disciple spoken of at the Last Supper (21:20-23; cf. 13:21-26).<\/p>\n<p>Because the phrase is found only in John’s Gospel, could it be the author’s way of referring to himself? Several passages make that seem very likely.<\/p>\n<p>A list of names given in John 21:2 indicates that the disciples present at the lakeshore were Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee (James and John), and two others. Evidently the beloved disciple was one of the sons of Zebedee or else one of the two unnamed disciples.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple was almost certainly one of the Twelve, since he was present at the Last Supper, and evidently only the 12 disciples were there with Jesus (Mt 26:20; Mk 14:17-20; Lk 22:14, 30). That eliminates Lazarus and John Mark, who have sometimes been suggested as possibilities for the beloved disciple.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple appeared to be close to Peter (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7; see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Matthew, Mark, and Luke record that Peter, James, and John were constantly selected by Jesus to be with him. Since Peter was mentioned in connection with the disciple whom Jesus loved, and since James was martyred early (Acts 12:2), only John is left as a reasonable possibility—if, as is generally regarded, John’s Gospel was written long after James’s death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BELOVED DISCIPLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved, reporting that Jesus’ body was missing from the tomb (20:2). (4) The disciple whom Jesus loved was in a fishing boat with Peter and the other disciples and recognized Jesus standing on the shore (21:7). (5) The disciple whom Jesus loved was following Jesus by the lakeshore, and the author reminded his readers that this was the same disciple spoken of at the Last Supper (21:20-23; cf. 13:21-26).<\/p>\n<p>Because the phrase is found only in John’s Gospel, could it be the author’s way of referring to himself? Several passages make that seem very likely.<\/p>\n<p>A list of names given in John 21:2 indicates that the disciples present at the lakeshore were Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee (James and John), and two others. Evidently the beloved disciple was one of the sons of Zebedee or else one of the two unnamed disciples.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple was almost certainly one of the Twelve, since he was present at the Last Supper, and evidently only the 12 disciples were there with Jesus (Mt 26:20; Mk 14:17-20; Lk 22:14, 30). That eliminates Lazarus and John Mark, who have sometimes been suggested as possibilities for the beloved disciple.<\/p>\n<p>The beloved disciple appeared to be close to Peter (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7; see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Matthew, Mark, and Luke record that Peter, James, and John were constantly selected by Jesus to be with him. Since Peter was mentioned in connection with the disciple whom Jesus loved, and since James was martyred early (Acts 12:2), only John is left as a reasonable possibility—if, as is generally regarded, John’s Gospel was written long after James’s death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BELOVED DISCIPLE* Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the di...","summary_en":"BELOVED DISCIPLE* Designation of one disciple, evidently the author of the Gospel of John (Jn 21:20-24). Five passages in John’s Gospel mention the disciple whom Jesus loved: (1) The disciple whom Jesus loved lay close to Jesus’ chest during the Last Supper and was beckoned by Peter to ask Jesus who the betrayer would be (13:21-26). (2) The disciple whom Jesus loved stood near the cross, and Mary the mother of Jesus was given to his care (19:25-27). (3) Mary Magdalene came to Peter and the di...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9651,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disciple","title_en":"Disciple","content_ro":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","summary_en":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":19552,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":42284,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69910,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97536,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125162,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9753,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Dish","title_en":"Dish","content_ro":"<h3>DISH<\/h3>\n<p>A vessel, usually made of baked clay or metal, used in everyday life and in religious ceremony. Dishes were used to serve or preserve food (Jgs 5:25; Mt 26:23; Mk 14:20). They had to be wiped and left to dry (2 Kgs 21:13), but later the Pharisees added a ritual cleansing as well (Mt 23:25-26; Lk 11:39). Dishes were used in connection with the meal offering (Nm 7:13) and with the table of showbread for worship in the OT tabernacle and temple (Ex 25:29; 37:16; Nm 4:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISH<\/h3>\n<p>A vessel, usually made of baked clay or metal, used in everyday life and in religious ceremony. Dishes were used to serve or preserve food (Jgs 5:25; Mt 26:23; Mk 14:20). They had to be wiped and left to dry (2 Kgs 21:13), but later the Pharisees added a ritual cleansing as well (Mt 23:25-26; Lk 11:39). Dishes were used in connection with the meal offering (Nm 7:13) and with the table of showbread for worship in the OT tabernacle and temple (Ex 25:29; 37:16; Nm 4:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISH A vessel, usually made of baked clay or metal, used in everyday life and in religious ceremony. Dishes were used to serve or preserve food (Jgs 5:25; Mt 26:23; Mk 14:20). They had to be wiped and left to dry (2 Kgs 21:13), but later the Pharisees added a ritual cleansing as well (Mt 23:25-26; Lk 11:39). Dishes were used in connection with the meal offering (Nm 7:13) and with the table of showbread for worship in the OT tabernacle and temple (Ex 25:29; 37:16; Nm 4:7).","summary_en":"DISH A vessel, usually made of baked clay or metal, used in everyday life and in religious ceremony. Dishes were used to serve or preserve food (Jgs 5:25; Mt 26:23; Mk 14:20). They had to be wiped and left to dry (2 Kgs 21:13), but later the Pharisees added a ritual cleansing as well (Mt 23:25-26; Lk 11:39). Dishes were used in connection with the meal offering (Nm 7:13) and with the table of showbread for worship in the OT tabernacle and temple (Ex 25:29; 37:16; Nm 4:7).","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55045,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","summary_en":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82671,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","summary_en":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110297,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","summary_en":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137923,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:23<\/strong> <em>eaten from this bowl with me:<\/em> It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","summary_en":"26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":42003,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","summary_en":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42277,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69629,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","summary_en":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69903,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97255,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","summary_en":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97529,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124881,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this son of man’s kingdom over all peoples and nations (see 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The scene surrounding this son of man indicates his divine characteristics. That he comes “with the clouds of heaven” (7:13) indicates his heavenly origin (cp. Ps 68:4; 97:2; Nah 1:3). The Lord God covered himself with a cloud in the book of Exodus (Exod 19:9). God’s people will be caught up into the clouds (1 Thes 4:17) when Jesus returns as he was received into a cloud at his ascension (Acts 1:9). This son of man receives his kingdom with humility and holiness, not arrogantly grasping after it. He is thus opposite in character to the “little horn” (Dan 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus identifies himself with this Son of Man (Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; see also Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14). Revelation 1:7 likewise yokes this figure with Jesus Christ, the one who was pierced for our sins. God the Father has given Jesus all authority and power to rule over all things (Dan 7:14; Matt 28:18) and to win people from all the nations and kingdoms of the world (Matt 28:19-20). God’s purpose in calling Abraham was to make a great nation through his people and to bless all nations through him (Gen 12:1-3). Jesus fulfilled this promise.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Dan 7:13-14; Matt 24:30; 26:24; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; John 12:34; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","summary_en":"The Son of Man The Hebrew and Aramaic idiom “son of man” simply means “human being.” But the majestic yet humble figure in Daniel 7:13-14, who is “like a son of man”—meaning that he looked like a man—also appears to be much more. His exact identity is not specified, but his role is clear: The Most High has appointed him to rule an eternal, universal kingdom that will be over all other nations. He also represents his own people, the holy people of the Most High. They will also share in this so...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125155,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19642,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35864,"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":55046,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","summary_en":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82672,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","summary_en":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110298,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","summary_en":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137924,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:24<\/strong> <em>as the Scriptures declared:<\/em> Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","summary_en":"26:24 as the Scriptures declared: Jesus might have been referring to Isa 53:7-9 or to the broader Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah. This verse combines God’s sovereign will with human responsibility.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64964,"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":92590,"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":120216,"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":147842,"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}],"25":[{"id":55047,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","summary_en":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82673,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","summary_en":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110299,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","summary_en":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137925,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:25<\/strong> Judas referred to Jesus as <em>Rabbi<\/em><em>,<\/em> while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • <em>“You have said it”:<\/em> This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","summary_en":"26:25 Judas referred to Jesus as Rabbi, while the other disciples call him “Lord” (26:22). • “You have said it”: This enigmatic statement affirmed that Judas was the betrayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":5412,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Body of Christ","title_en":"Body of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","summary_en":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19545,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19647,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23478,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24836,"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":55048,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","summary_en":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55049,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","summary_en":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82674,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","summary_en":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82675,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","summary_en":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110300,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","summary_en":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110301,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","summary_en":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137926,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26-29<\/strong> The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover <em>haggadah<\/em> (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) second cup is taken; (9) blessing and eating of unleavened bread (Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19); (10) the Passover lamb is eaten; (11) third cup (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24; Luke 22:20); (12) fourth cup (see Matt 26:29[?]; Mark 14:25[?]); (13) time of fellowship; (14) second part of the <em>hallel<\/em> (Pss 115–118; see Matt 26:30). None of the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper includes every aspect of a typical Jewish Passover. However, the most important aspects of the Passover that gave meaning to the early Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper are included (see 1 Cor 11:23-25). Jesus, the Lamb of God, is the ultimate Passover lamb and the perfect sacrifice for sin. • <em>this is my body . . . my blood:<\/em> Ever since the Reformation, there have been three dominant interpretations of Jesus’ statements concerning the bread and the wine: (1) that the bread and wine change into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (<em>transubstantiation<\/em>); (2) that Christ is mysteriously present in the sacrament either spiritually (<em>real presence<\/em>) or “in, with, and under” the bread and wine (<em>consubstantiation<\/em>); (3) that the bread and wine symbolize the body and blood of Christ, benefiting the recipient through the Spirit by faith (<em>symbolism<\/em>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","summary_en":"26:26-29 The Last Supper derives its significance in part from the Jewish Passover (see Exod 12). The phases of the Jewish liturgy for Passover are as follows: (1) Festal blessing; (2) first cup (see Luke 22:17-18); (3) eating bitter herbs (see Matt 26:23 and corresponding study note); (4) eating unleavened bread (26:26; Mark 14:22); (5) second cup is mixed; (6) the Passover haggadah (reading) is given (Exod 12); (7) first part of the hallel (Pss 113–114; see study note on Pss 113–118); (8) s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137927,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:26<\/strong> The unleavened <em>bread<\/em> of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","summary_en":"26:26 The unleavened bread of the Passover (Exod 12:18) is also described as the “bread of suffering” (Deut 16:3), referring to hardships in Egypt. • The customary blessing over the bread in the Passover meal was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64386,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64998,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92012,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92624,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119638,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120250,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147264,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts","title_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts","content_ro":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Prophetic Sign Acts<\/h3>\n<p>The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people <em>feel<\/em> the truth as much as <em>hear<\/em> it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these sign acts as a regular part of a prophet’s communication style.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was required to act out his message more frequently than any other prophet, perhaps because he was communicating to a particularly hardened audience (Ezek 2:6-7). The sign acts reinforced the content of his message and underlined the depth of his personal commitment to it. For example, after he swallowed the word of God (2:8–3:3), Ezekiel embodied it for the exiles (3:4-9) in a series of judgment scenes (chs 4–6). This dramatic form of communication is difficult for even a hostile audience to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p>The ultimate sign act was performed by Jesus Christ on the cross (see Matt 27:32-54). There God visibly depicted his wrath against sin in the darkness, the earthquake, and the agony of the sinless one who was apparently abandoned by his Father. God also depicted his profound love for the world in that he would rather die than let his people go. The cross is a confrontational message of God’s love and wrath that is hard to ignore or forget.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 13:1-11; 19:1-15; 25:15; Ezek 2:6–3:3; 3:4-9; 4:1-17; 5:1–6:14; 12:1-28; 21:19-23; 24:1-14, 16-27; 37:15-28; Hos 1:2-9; 3:1-3; Matt 26:26-28; 27:45-54; Mark 6:11; 11:12-21; Luke 22:17-20; Rom 6:3-5; 1 Cor 10:16-17; 11:23-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","summary_en":"Prophetic Sign Acts The prophets of Israel occasionally communicated through sign acts, which were dramatic visual aids performed in public to increase the impact of the message and help people feel the truth as much as hear it. Their purpose was to present an unforgettable message. These acts were unusual, even outlandish—and not just from a modern perspective. Unlike modern readers, however (who might think that the prophet was psychologically disturbed), ancient observers understood these ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147876,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":38457,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wine","title_en":"Wine","content_ro":"<h3>WINE<\/h3>\n<p>Beverage made from fermented grape juice.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>Noah was among the first to produce wine (Gn 9:21), presumably on the slopes of Mt Ararat. But wine making was not confined to that region, because Egypt, and later Greece, had a fondness for the juice. In fact, wine making was known to have existed in the prehistoric period of Mesopotamia and was brought to Egypt before 3000 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The word “wine” may be identified with words for vine, vineyard, and black grapes. The vine, which brings forth the wine, was often identified in the Near Eastern world with the “tree of life.” In both Egypt and Mesopotamia a goddess was thought to protect the vine. The “mistress of the heavenly tree of life,” the goddess Siris, lived in the mountains of northwestern Assyria. First Enoch 32:4 calls the vine the tree of knowledge. According to Jewish tradition, the vine was saved from the Flood by Noah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProductionofWine\">Production of Wine<\/p>\n<p>Few ancient documents are extant on the art of wine making. Experience and the interests of a few early botanists appear to be the only source of knowledge available about the early vine growers. Aristotle’s gifted student Theophrastus of Eresos wrote a book entitled <em>Enquiry into Plants<\/em> showing a blend of practical experience and theory. Later, he followed with <em>On the Life of Plants,<\/em> a work giving detailed observations about wine making. His ideas on when to plant, how to prune, statements against grafting, and how to care for the vine demonstrate the Greek genius. They raised viticulture to a science that has changed little in the last 2200 years.<\/p>\n<p>Great care was taken by Greek vine growers to ensure the success of their crops. The vines were close to the ground instead of being propped. In view of this, mice and foxes were especially undesirable, and much hoeing was needed to keep the soil free of weeds. But their method, overall, was very effective.<\/p>\n<p>In early September the grapes were collected in the plains, and at the end of the month in the hills. With an initial festival of song and dance, the workers brought the bunches of grapes to the winepresses, low cement vats inclined toward one corner. After this, workers trod the grapes. The first <em>must<\/em> (juice from the crushing) was highly valued because it provided the choicest wines. The remaining juice was extracted by wringing the trodden grapes in a bag press usually made of cloth. A third class of wine was produced by mixing or even cooking the remaining grapes with some water and expressing the mixture. This type of wine was drunk only by the poor.<\/p>\n<p>At a later time the Greeks invented a beam press in which a long beam, having a turning portion at one end and heavy stones on the other, compressed layers of grapes. The ancient Near East had these different methods of extracting wine, but the treading of grapes, even in Greece, was always the favorite method.<\/p>\n<p>In Greece the fermentation period was usually six months, during which the liquid was constantly skimmed. However, in the ancient Near East the fermentation process was usually over in three or four days, the optimum growth temperature being 77 degrees. The ancients knew that any further fermentation would produce acid.<\/p>\n<p>After desired fermentation, the wine was transferred to skins or pottery jars for transport or sale. The handles and stoppers were stamped to indicate the brand, the origin, and the vintage. At this time the wine was strained through perforated metal sieves or cloth to eliminate contaminates such as grit or insects.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KindsofWine\">Kinds of Wine<\/p>\n<p>Ancient poets discuss many different brands of wine, with Athenaeus mentioning 85 different varieties. Galen cites 60; Pliny mentions 150; and Strabo, 30. Wines are distinguished by different colors (black, red, white, or yellow) and by their taste (dry, harsh, light, or sweet). The biblical account enumerates various kinds of wine, such as the wines of Lebanon and Helbon. Hebron and Samaria were famous for their wine making. The Hebrew language has at least nine different words for wine, and the Greek has four that are mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NatureofWine\">Nature of Wine<\/p>\n<p>Few would question that at least some wine of the OT was fermented. Some scholars argue, however, that certain forms of wine in the ancient world were unfermented. They contrast two Hebrew words for wine, concluding that one particular Hebrew word that refers to fresh wine meant only grape juice (Prv 3:10; Hos 9:2; Jl 2:24; Mi 6:15). The inconclusiveness of these arguments may be seen from the following points: (1) the Hebrew word is found in primarily neutral contexts; (2) often that particular word is found in contexts definitely including a fermented beverage (e.g., Gn 27:28; Hos 4:11; Mi 6:15); (3) the Ugaritic parallel to the term in question refers with certainty to a fermented wine; (4) the Septuagint equivalents refer to fermented wine; (5) fermentation in the ancient Near East, unlike Greece, took only about three days; and (6) the Mishnah provides no such evidence of the practice of having unfermented wine. There seems to have been no attempts to preserve wine in an unfermented state; it may have been a near-impossible task. A careful examination of all the Hebrew words (as well as their Semitic cognates) and the Greek words for wine demonstrates that the ancients knew little, if anything, about unfermented wine.<\/p>\n<p>Ample evidence is available to demonstrate that wine, though always fermented, was usually mixed with water in the classical and Hellenistic world. The wine was stored in large jugs called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amphorae<\/span><em>,<\/em> from which the wine was poured through a strainer into a large mixing bowl called a <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">krater<\/span><em>.<\/em> In the krater the wine was mixed with water. Then the drinking bowls or cups were filled.<\/p>\n<p>The amount of wine per volume varied. The mixture that represented the greatest amount of water to wine was 20 to 1, apparently because the wine was so strong (Homer, <em>Odyssey<\/em> 10.208).<\/p>\n<p>In the western Mediterranean world, the term “wine” referred to the mixture of wine and water. If one desired to mention wine without water, it was necessary to add the word “unmixed.” For the Greeks, to drink wine unmixed was regarded as barbaric. The evidence, however, seems to indicate that in the OT era wine was used without being mixed with water. The terminology of mixing water and wine is strikingly unattested. Wine diluted with water was symbolic of spiritual adulteration (Is 1:22). By Roman times, this attitude had changed. The Mishnah assumes a ratio of two parts of water to one part wine; however, later Talmudic sources speak of three to one. A natural, nondistilled wine could reach as high as 15 percent alcohol content. If watered down three parts water to one part wine, the alcohol content would be 5 percent and still fairly potent.<\/p>\n<p>Wine was mixed not only with water but also with other ingredients, similar to mixed drinks today. An example of this is seen in the Homeric “Hymn to Demeter,” where the goddess rejects straight wine and desires the drink mixed with meal, water, and a soft mint. Often strong wine was mixed into weak wine, resulting in a stronger drink. This is what is meant by “mixture” in the Bible (Ps 75:8; Is 5:22; Rv 18:6; 19:13-15). At times the fresh wine, high in sugar content, was evaporated, and this concentrated <em>must<\/em> was mixed with wine to obtain a higher alcohol content.<\/p>\n<p>There is no mention of wine being mixed with water to make it safe for drinking, as is commonly accepted. Modern examples of pollution were not common in the ancient world, although this problem appeared occasionally. Examples are myriad concerning the fresh wells, springs, and moving bodies of water in biblical times, and methods were available to purify any impure water.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WineintheOldTestament\">Wine in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The evidence, as seen above, suggests that wine in the OT was not mixed with water and was looked on with favor when taken in moderation. Judges 9:13 presents wine as that “which cheers God and men.” Psalm 104:15 portrays wine similarly: “wine which makes man’s heart glad” (cf. also Est 1:10; Eccl 10:19; Is 55:1-2; Zec 10:7). The temperate use of wine was a normal and accepted part of life (Gn 14:18; Jgs 19:19; 1 Sm 16:20). Levitical priests in service at the temple (Lv 10:8-9), Nazirites (Nm 6:3), and the Recabites (Jer 35:1-6) were forbidden to drink wine.<\/p>\n<p>Wine had many uses in the OT world. The “drink offering” was wine (Ex 29:40; Lv 23:13), and the worshiper regularly brought wine when offering sacrifice (1 Sm 1:24). In addition, a supply of wine was kept in the temple for sacrificial purposes (1 Chr 9:29). At times, wine was used in helping the weak and sick (2 Sm 16:2; Prv 31:6).<\/p>\n<p>The strong drink of the OT seems to be closely related to Mesopotamian date wine. This same date wine, high in sugar content, must have also been high in alcohol content. One Hebrew word is consistently used as strong drink (Lv 10:9; Dt 29:6; 1 Sm 1:15; Prv 20:1; 31:6; Is 29:9). There is an equivalent word to this in Ugaritic, translated “drunk,” which parallels the normal word for wine.<\/p>\n<p>Negative reactions to intemperate wine drinking abound in the OT. Isaiah condemned those who drank wine to excess (Is 28:1-8). Many admonitions of drinking wine in excess are given in the Scriptures (Prv 20:1; 21:17; 23:20-21; 23:32-34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WineintheNewTestament\">Wine in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Wine in the NT was a fermented beverage that was mixed with various amounts of water. It was also mixed with gall (Mt 27:34) and myrrh (Mk 15:23). Evidence strongly suggests that the wine used at the Lord’s Supper was a mixture of water and wine, probably three to one in agreement with the dictates of the Mishnah. The phrase “fruit of the vine” (Mt 26:27-29) is often interpreted to mean fresh grape juice. However, fresh grape juice would be all but impossible to find.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, as the OT, argues forcefully against the unrestrained use of wine. The biblical admonition is not to be drunk with wine (Eph 5:18; 1 Pt 4:3). Leaders in the church were to practice moderation in the use of wine (1 Tm 3:3, 8; Ti 1:7); the Greek says that they should “not be addicted to wine.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vines, Vineyard; Winepress.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WINE<\/h3>\n<p>Beverage made from fermented grape juice.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>Noah was among the first to produce wine (Gn 9:21), presumably on the slopes of Mt Ararat. But wine making was not confined to that region, because Egypt, and later Greece, had a fondness for the juice. In fact, wine making was known to have existed in the prehistoric period of Mesopotamia and was brought to Egypt before 3000 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The word “wine” may be identified with words for vine, vineyard, and black grapes. The vine, which brings forth the wine, was often identified in the Near Eastern world with the “tree of life.” In both Egypt and Mesopotamia a goddess was thought to protect the vine. The “mistress of the heavenly tree of life,” the goddess Siris, lived in the mountains of northwestern Assyria. First Enoch 32:4 calls the vine the tree of knowledge. According to Jewish tradition, the vine was saved from the Flood by Noah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProductionofWine\">Production of Wine<\/p>\n<p>Few ancient documents are extant on the art of wine making. Experience and the interests of a few early botanists appear to be the only source of knowledge available about the early vine growers. Aristotle’s gifted student Theophrastus of Eresos wrote a book entitled <em>Enquiry into Plants<\/em> showing a blend of practical experience and theory. Later, he followed with <em>On the Life of Plants,<\/em> a work giving detailed observations about wine making. His ideas on when to plant, how to prune, statements against grafting, and how to care for the vine demonstrate the Greek genius. They raised viticulture to a science that has changed little in the last 2200 years.<\/p>\n<p>Great care was taken by Greek vine growers to ensure the success of their crops. The vines were close to the ground instead of being propped. In view of this, mice and foxes were especially undesirable, and much hoeing was needed to keep the soil free of weeds. But their method, overall, was very effective.<\/p>\n<p>In early September the grapes were collected in the plains, and at the end of the month in the hills. With an initial festival of song and dance, the workers brought the bunches of grapes to the winepresses, low cement vats inclined toward one corner. After this, workers trod the grapes. The first <em>must<\/em> (juice from the crushing) was highly valued because it provided the choicest wines. The remaining juice was extracted by wringing the trodden grapes in a bag press usually made of cloth. A third class of wine was produced by mixing or even cooking the remaining grapes with some water and expressing the mixture. This type of wine was drunk only by the poor.<\/p>\n<p>At a later time the Greeks invented a beam press in which a long beam, having a turning portion at one end and heavy stones on the other, compressed layers of grapes. The ancient Near East had these different methods of extracting wine, but the treading of grapes, even in Greece, was always the favorite method.<\/p>\n<p>In Greece the fermentation period was usually six months, during which the liquid was constantly skimmed. However, in the ancient Near East the fermentation process was usually over in three or four days, the optimum growth temperature being 77 degrees. The ancients knew that any further fermentation would produce acid.<\/p>\n<p>After desired fermentation, the wine was transferred to skins or pottery jars for transport or sale. The handles and stoppers were stamped to indicate the brand, the origin, and the vintage. At this time the wine was strained through perforated metal sieves or cloth to eliminate contaminates such as grit or insects.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KindsofWine\">Kinds of Wine<\/p>\n<p>Ancient poets discuss many different brands of wine, with Athenaeus mentioning 85 different varieties. Galen cites 60; Pliny mentions 150; and Strabo, 30. Wines are distinguished by different colors (black, red, white, or yellow) and by their taste (dry, harsh, light, or sweet). The biblical account enumerates various kinds of wine, such as the wines of Lebanon and Helbon. Hebron and Samaria were famous for their wine making. The Hebrew language has at least nine different words for wine, and the Greek has four that are mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NatureofWine\">Nature of Wine<\/p>\n<p>Few would question that at least some wine of the OT was fermented. Some scholars argue, however, that certain forms of wine in the ancient world were unfermented. They contrast two Hebrew words for wine, concluding that one particular Hebrew word that refers to fresh wine meant only grape juice (Prv 3:10; Hos 9:2; Jl 2:24; Mi 6:15). The inconclusiveness of these arguments may be seen from the following points: (1) the Hebrew word is found in primarily neutral contexts; (2) often that particular word is found in contexts definitely including a fermented beverage (e.g., Gn 27:28; Hos 4:11; Mi 6:15); (3) the Ugaritic parallel to the term in question refers with certainty to a fermented wine; (4) the Septuagint equivalents refer to fermented wine; (5) fermentation in the ancient Near East, unlike Greece, took only about three days; and (6) the Mishnah provides no such evidence of the practice of having unfermented wine. There seems to have been no attempts to preserve wine in an unfermented state; it may have been a near-impossible task. A careful examination of all the Hebrew words (as well as their Semitic cognates) and the Greek words for wine demonstrates that the ancients knew little, if anything, about unfermented wine.<\/p>\n<p>Ample evidence is available to demonstrate that wine, though always fermented, was usually mixed with water in the classical and Hellenistic world. The wine was stored in large jugs called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">amphorae<\/span><em>,<\/em> from which the wine was poured through a strainer into a large mixing bowl called a <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">krater<\/span><em>.<\/em> In the krater the wine was mixed with water. Then the drinking bowls or cups were filled.<\/p>\n<p>The amount of wine per volume varied. The mixture that represented the greatest amount of water to wine was 20 to 1, apparently because the wine was so strong (Homer, <em>Odyssey<\/em> 10.208).<\/p>\n<p>In the western Mediterranean world, the term “wine” referred to the mixture of wine and water. If one desired to mention wine without water, it was necessary to add the word “unmixed.” For the Greeks, to drink wine unmixed was regarded as barbaric. The evidence, however, seems to indicate that in the OT era wine was used without being mixed with water. The terminology of mixing water and wine is strikingly unattested. Wine diluted with water was symbolic of spiritual adulteration (Is 1:22). By Roman times, this attitude had changed. The Mishnah assumes a ratio of two parts of water to one part wine; however, later Talmudic sources speak of three to one. A natural, nondistilled wine could reach as high as 15 percent alcohol content. If watered down three parts water to one part wine, the alcohol content would be 5 percent and still fairly potent.<\/p>\n<p>Wine was mixed not only with water but also with other ingredients, similar to mixed drinks today. An example of this is seen in the Homeric “Hymn to Demeter,” where the goddess rejects straight wine and desires the drink mixed with meal, water, and a soft mint. Often strong wine was mixed into weak wine, resulting in a stronger drink. This is what is meant by “mixture” in the Bible (Ps 75:8; Is 5:22; Rv 18:6; 19:13-15). At times the fresh wine, high in sugar content, was evaporated, and this concentrated <em>must<\/em> was mixed with wine to obtain a higher alcohol content.<\/p>\n<p>There is no mention of wine being mixed with water to make it safe for drinking, as is commonly accepted. Modern examples of pollution were not common in the ancient world, although this problem appeared occasionally. Examples are myriad concerning the fresh wells, springs, and moving bodies of water in biblical times, and methods were available to purify any impure water.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WineintheOldTestament\">Wine in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The evidence, as seen above, suggests that wine in the OT was not mixed with water and was looked on with favor when taken in moderation. Judges 9:13 presents wine as that “which cheers God and men.” Psalm 104:15 portrays wine similarly: “wine which makes man’s heart glad” (cf. also Est 1:10; Eccl 10:19; Is 55:1-2; Zec 10:7). The temperate use of wine was a normal and accepted part of life (Gn 14:18; Jgs 19:19; 1 Sm 16:20). Levitical priests in service at the temple (Lv 10:8-9), Nazirites (Nm 6:3), and the Recabites (Jer 35:1-6) were forbidden to drink wine.<\/p>\n<p>Wine had many uses in the OT world. The “drink offering” was wine (Ex 29:40; Lv 23:13), and the worshiper regularly brought wine when offering sacrifice (1 Sm 1:24). In addition, a supply of wine was kept in the temple for sacrificial purposes (1 Chr 9:29). At times, wine was used in helping the weak and sick (2 Sm 16:2; Prv 31:6).<\/p>\n<p>The strong drink of the OT seems to be closely related to Mesopotamian date wine. This same date wine, high in sugar content, must have also been high in alcohol content. One Hebrew word is consistently used as strong drink (Lv 10:9; Dt 29:6; 1 Sm 1:15; Prv 20:1; 31:6; Is 29:9). There is an equivalent word to this in Ugaritic, translated “drunk,” which parallels the normal word for wine.<\/p>\n<p>Negative reactions to intemperate wine drinking abound in the OT. Isaiah condemned those who drank wine to excess (Is 28:1-8). Many admonitions of drinking wine in excess are given in the Scriptures (Prv 20:1; 21:17; 23:20-21; 23:32-34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WineintheNewTestament\">Wine in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Wine in the NT was a fermented beverage that was mixed with various amounts of water. It was also mixed with gall (Mt 27:34) and myrrh (Mk 15:23). Evidence strongly suggests that the wine used at the Lord’s Supper was a mixture of water and wine, probably three to one in agreement with the dictates of the Mishnah. The phrase “fruit of the vine” (Mt 26:27-29) is often interpreted to mean fresh grape juice. However, fresh grape juice would be all but impossible to find.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, as the OT, argues forcefully against the unrestrained use of wine. The biblical admonition is not to be drunk with wine (Eph 5:18; 1 Pt 4:3). Leaders in the church were to practice moderation in the use of wine (1 Tm 3:3, 8; Ti 1:7); the Greek says that they should “not be addicted to wine.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vines, Vineyard; Winepress.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WINE Beverage made from fermented grape juice. Origin Noah was among the first to produce wine (Gn 9:21), presumably on the slopes of Mt Ararat. But wine making was not confined to that region, because Egypt, and later Greece, had a fondness for the juice. In fact, wine making was known to have existed in the prehistoric period of Mesopotamia and was brought to Egypt before 3000 BC. The word “wine” may be identified with words for vine, vineyard, and black grapes. The vine, which brings forth...","summary_en":"WINE Beverage made from fermented grape juice. Origin Noah was among the first to produce wine (Gn 9:21), presumably on the slopes of Mt Ararat. But wine making was not confined to that region, because Egypt, and later Greece, had a fondness for the juice. In fact, wine making was known to have existed in the prehistoric period of Mesopotamia and was brought to Egypt before 3000 BC. The word “wine” may be identified with words for vine, vineyard, and black grapes. The vine, which brings forth...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55050,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","summary_en":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82676,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","summary_en":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110302,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","summary_en":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137928,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:27<\/strong> He <em>gave thanks<\/em>. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (<em>Didache<\/em> 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (see Matt 26:27-28), and one for fellowship (see 26:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","summary_en":"26:27 He gave thanks. The traditional blessing for the Passover cup was “Blessed are you, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine.” An early Christian variant is, “We give thanks to you, our Father, for the Holy Vine of David, your child, whom you made known to us through Jesus your child; glory be to you forever” (Didache 9.2). • The four cups of the Passover meal correspond to the fourfold promise of Exod 6:6-7, with two for deliverance, one for redemption (s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61597,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Land","title_en":"The Land","content_ro":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","summary_en":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64298,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67165,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89223,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Land","title_en":"The Land","content_ro":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","summary_en":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91924,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94791,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116849,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Land","title_en":"The Land","content_ro":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","summary_en":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119550,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122417,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144475,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Land","title_en":"The Land","content_ro":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Land<\/h3>\n<p>Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “special possession” (Deut 4:21), given by God, who required their fidelity (Deut 4:40). God expected the people to be proper stewards of the land and to serve him faithfully.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, God’s people turned to their own ways, serving pagan gods and themselves (2 Kgs 17:7-17). So God allowed foreign nations to gradually take away Israel’s ownership of the land (e.g., 2 Kgs 8:20-22; 13:1-3; 17:3). Eventually, Assyria launched a full-scale invasion of the northern kingdom, sending the Israelites into exile (17:5-6, 22-23). Through these events God warned the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, that if they, too, failed to respond, they would forfeit their land (2 Kgs 21:8). Sadly, they refused to listen (2 Kgs 21:9), and their unfaithfulness eventually resulted in expulsion from the land at the hands of the Babylonians (25:1-21).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s rebellion and failure to properly manage the land that God entrusted to them serves as a warning to us. God has redeemed us in Christ Jesus so that we may live faithful and productive lives (John 15:16; Eph 2:4-10). Our infidelity and lack of productivity may cause us to lose our place of service for Christ (John 15:1-2, 6). It is by abiding in him that we “produce much fruit” and grow in our faith (John 15:5).<\/p>\n<p>God’s people always have a propensity to sin (see Rom 3:23; 1 Jn 1:8, 10). Nevertheless, God always stands ready to forgive and restore those who turn back to him (see 1 Jn 1:9) and to reinstate the blessings of his covenant. The one who mediates the new covenant between God and his people (Matt 26:27-28) is also their advocate in heaven (1 Jn 2:1). In the end, those who remain faithful to God will inherit the blessings of the new heaven and the new earth (1 Pet 1:3-5; Rev 21:1-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 28:1-68; 1 Kgs 8:29-51; 9:3-9; 2 Kgs 17:18-23; Pss 24:1; 89:11; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 21:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","summary_en":"The Land Land is extremely important to a largely agrarian society such as ancient Israel. Israel was given the privilege and responsibility of living in the land of Canaan, as a key provision of God’s covenant with them (1 Kgs 8:33-40; see also Deut 28). The land was part of Israel’s relationship with God: God had promised this land to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1-3; 13:14-17). The nation of Israel lived in the land as its custodians and earthly possessors. The land was Israel’s “sp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147176,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150043,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\n<p>In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":3186,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Atonement","title_en":"Atonement","content_ro":"<h3>ATONEMENT<\/h3>\n<p>In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness.<\/p>\n<p>In the <span>kjv<\/span> the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT but only once in the NT (Rom 5:11). Modern translations generally, and more correctly, render the word “reconciliation.” The idea of atonement is ever present in the NT, however, and is one of the fundamental concepts of Scripture. God is seen as taking the initiative in man’s salvation; thus atonement is the work of God, who opens the possibility for sinful human beings to receive pardoning grace. For the sinner, who cannot know God, who cannot bridge the gap between himself and God, a “new and living way” is opened up by God.<\/p>\n<p>The need for atonement is bound up with man’s thoroughgoing sinfulness. All of Scripture (cited below from the <span>rsv<\/span> unless otherwise noted) points to the radical nature of that sinfulness. The prophet Isaiah affirmed, “All we like sheep have gone astray” (Is 53:6). According to another prophet, Jeremiah, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?” (Jer 17:9). David the psalmist cried, “There is none that does good, no, not one” (Ps 14:3). Paul described the degeneracy of man caused by his disobedience and idolatry (Rom 1:18-32) and summed it up: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). Elsewhere Paul described men as enemies of God (Rom 5:10), as “hostile to God” (Rom 8:7), as “estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds” (Col 1:21). Adam’s race is just like Adam: “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom 5:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>The problem of the sinfulness of humanity is compounded by the holiness of God, who cannot look upon sin. Isaiah saw the holy God in the temple and drew back because of his own sinfulness (Is 6:1-5). Not only is man terribly sinful, but God is fearfully holy. Consequently man dreads God and can do nothing to change this situation. He is lost, helpless, standing under the awful judgment of God. He cannot justify himself before God and cannot merit God’s concern. The possibility of atonement, then, rests entirely with God. The nature of that atonement, as illustrated in biblical history, affirms simultaneously the nature of both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew term frequently translated “atone” has the basic meaning “to wipe out,” “to erase, “to cover,” or perhaps more generally “to remove.” In the <span>kjv<\/span> it is translated by such expressions as “to make atonement,” “forgive,” “appease,” “pacify,” “pardon,” “purge,” “put off,” and “reconcile.”<\/p>\n<p>The most common OT expression of the means of atonement was the sacrifice and offering up of the blood of a victim. In a sacrifice the shedding of blood was the central act. Life was in the blood (Lv 17:11); in the pouring out of the blood, life was given up; that is, death occurred. Elsewhere blood may be a symbol for life, but in the sacrificial motif it symbolized death. Some scholars have argued that in the pouring forth of the blood, life was made available to the people. It was the life <em>of the flesh,<\/em> however, that was in the blood, and the flesh was sacrificed. In the NT it is by virtue of the resurrection that the life of Christ is made available to believers.<\/p>\n<p>Not every OT mention of atonement referred directly to the shedding of blood. On the Day of Atonement one of two goats was slain, but the other was “presented alive before the Lord to make atonement” (Lv 16:10). That “scapegoat” was driven out into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people. Banishment or expulsion took the place of blood as the goat, bearing the sins of the people, suffered the fate of the sinner. The goat was a substitute for the people. Money offered for the temple was also said to make atonement (Ex 30:16). In another text Aaron and Moses prevented the spreading of a plague by carrying incense: “He put on the incense, and made atonement for the people” (Nm 16:47). Those few special expressions do not undo the basic OT theme of atonement through provision of a substitute animal. The NT summarizes that theme by saying that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n<p>From atonement for sin in the OT came such terms as “expiation” and “forgiveness.” From the idea of atonement for the wrath or judgment of God came “propitiation” and “reconciliation.” Hence in modern English translations various terms attempt to express the concept of atonement provided by God.<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the NT it is made clear that the work of Christ, primarily the cross, is what provides atonement. OT language continues to find expression in the NT, especially the term “blood.” Thus in the NT we have the “blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:28) and the “new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20) as well as the “blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13) and the “blood of his cross” (Col 1:20). Almost equivalent are the frequent references to the cross and the death of Christ. The NT is the “new covenant” of Jesus Christ, sealed by his blood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Propitiation; Expiation; Offerings and Sacrifices; Atonement, Day of; Redeemer, Redemption; Ransom.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ATONEMENT<\/h3>\n<p>In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness.<\/p>\n<p>In the <span>kjv<\/span> the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT but only once in the NT (Rom 5:11). Modern translations generally, and more correctly, render the word “reconciliation.” The idea of atonement is ever present in the NT, however, and is one of the fundamental concepts of Scripture. God is seen as taking the initiative in man’s salvation; thus atonement is the work of God, who opens the possibility for sinful human beings to receive pardoning grace. For the sinner, who cannot know God, who cannot bridge the gap between himself and God, a “new and living way” is opened up by God.<\/p>\n<p>The need for atonement is bound up with man’s thoroughgoing sinfulness. All of Scripture (cited below from the <span>rsv<\/span> unless otherwise noted) points to the radical nature of that sinfulness. The prophet Isaiah affirmed, “All we like sheep have gone astray” (Is 53:6). According to another prophet, Jeremiah, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?” (Jer 17:9). David the psalmist cried, “There is none that does good, no, not one” (Ps 14:3). Paul described the degeneracy of man caused by his disobedience and idolatry (Rom 1:18-32) and summed it up: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). Elsewhere Paul described men as enemies of God (Rom 5:10), as “hostile to God” (Rom 8:7), as “estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds” (Col 1:21). Adam’s race is just like Adam: “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom 5:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>The problem of the sinfulness of humanity is compounded by the holiness of God, who cannot look upon sin. Isaiah saw the holy God in the temple and drew back because of his own sinfulness (Is 6:1-5). Not only is man terribly sinful, but God is fearfully holy. Consequently man dreads God and can do nothing to change this situation. He is lost, helpless, standing under the awful judgment of God. He cannot justify himself before God and cannot merit God’s concern. The possibility of atonement, then, rests entirely with God. The nature of that atonement, as illustrated in biblical history, affirms simultaneously the nature of both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew term frequently translated “atone” has the basic meaning “to wipe out,” “to erase, “to cover,” or perhaps more generally “to remove.” In the <span>kjv<\/span> it is translated by such expressions as “to make atonement,” “forgive,” “appease,” “pacify,” “pardon,” “purge,” “put off,” and “reconcile.”<\/p>\n<p>The most common OT expression of the means of atonement was the sacrifice and offering up of the blood of a victim. In a sacrifice the shedding of blood was the central act. Life was in the blood (Lv 17:11); in the pouring out of the blood, life was given up; that is, death occurred. Elsewhere blood may be a symbol for life, but in the sacrificial motif it symbolized death. Some scholars have argued that in the pouring forth of the blood, life was made available to the people. It was the life <em>of the flesh,<\/em> however, that was in the blood, and the flesh was sacrificed. In the NT it is by virtue of the resurrection that the life of Christ is made available to believers.<\/p>\n<p>Not every OT mention of atonement referred directly to the shedding of blood. On the Day of Atonement one of two goats was slain, but the other was “presented alive before the Lord to make atonement” (Lv 16:10). That “scapegoat” was driven out into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people. Banishment or expulsion took the place of blood as the goat, bearing the sins of the people, suffered the fate of the sinner. The goat was a substitute for the people. Money offered for the temple was also said to make atonement (Ex 30:16). In another text Aaron and Moses prevented the spreading of a plague by carrying incense: “He put on the incense, and made atonement for the people” (Nm 16:47). Those few special expressions do not undo the basic OT theme of atonement through provision of a substitute animal. The NT summarizes that theme by saying that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n<p>From atonement for sin in the OT came such terms as “expiation” and “forgiveness.” From the idea of atonement for the wrath or judgment of God came “propitiation” and “reconciliation.” Hence in modern English translations various terms attempt to express the concept of atonement provided by God.<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the NT it is made clear that the work of Christ, primarily the cross, is what provides atonement. OT language continues to find expression in the NT, especially the term “blood.” Thus in the NT we have the “blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:28) and the “new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20) as well as the “blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13) and the “blood of his cross” (Col 1:20). Almost equivalent are the frequent references to the cross and the death of Christ. The NT is the “new covenant” of Jesus Christ, sealed by his blood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Propitiation; Expiation; Offerings and Sacrifices; Atonement, Day of; Redeemer, Redemption; Ransom.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ATONEMENT In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness. In the kjv the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT ...","summary_en":"ATONEMENT In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness. In the kjv the word “atonement” occurs many times in the OT ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4649,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible*, Canon","title_en":"of the Bible*, Canon","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, C<span>anon of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato, Aristotle, and Homer form a canon of Greek literature, so the NT books became the canon of Christian literature. The criteria for selecting the books in the Jewish canon (the OT) are not known but clearly had to do with their worth in the ongoing life and religion of the worshiping nation. The criteria of the selection of NT books revolved around their “apostolicity,” according to early church writers. Like those of the OT, these books were collected and preserved by local churches in the continuing process of their worship and need for authoritative guidance for Christian living. The formation of the canon was a process, rather than an event, that took several hundred years to reach finality in all parts of the Roman Empire. Local canons were the basis for comparison, and out of them eventually emerged the general canon that exists in Christendom today, although some of the Eastern churches have a NT that is slightly smaller than that accepted in the West. Judaism, as well as Christianity as a whole, believes that the Spirit of God was operative in some providential way in the production and preservation of his Word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheOldTestament\">Canon of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament is a name that does not appear in Jewish literature. Jews prefer to call their collection of Scriptures the TANAK—an acronym formed from the first letters of <em>Torah<\/em> (Law), <em>Nevi<\/em><em>’<\/em><em>im<\/em> (Prophets), and <em>Kethubim<\/em> (Writings). In Luke 24:44 (<span>niv<\/span>), these are called the “Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (the first book of the Writings in the Hebrew Bible). Christians called their collection of writings the New Testament, or covenant, the latter term being a designation earlier used of the agreement God made with Abraham and the patriarchs, which was repeated by Christ to his apostles (Mt 26:28). Christians in the first century considered their new covenant from Christ (1 Cor 11:25) to be a continuation of the one made earlier with the patriarchs (Eph 2:12), spoken of by the prophets (Jer 31:31-34), and which was therefore called a former covenant (Heb 8:7-13; 9:1, 15-22) or in later centuries the OT. The terms “Old” and “New” do not appear in the apostolic fathers of the first and second century or in the apologists of the early- to mid-second century, but they do appear in the latter half of the second century in Justin Martyr (<em>Dialogues<\/em> 11:2), Irenaeus (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 4.9.1), and Clement of Alexandria (<em>Stromata<\/em> 1:5). In these authors the expression referred more to the covenant itself than to the books containing it, though the transfer was eventually made. The term “canon” was not used in the OT or NT to refer to the Jewish Scriptures. The idea of limitation inherent in the word was not appropriate to the nature of religious authority in Jewish religion during the thousand years when the OT books were being written. Only the Torah was conceived as incapable of being added to or taken from (Dt 4:2). Jewish religion existed for a millennium, from Moses to Malachi, without a closed canon, i.e., an exclusive list of authoritative books. Never in their history did the people of the OT have the entire 39 books of the OT. When their canon was closed is not known. Although some questions were being asked about religious authority by rabbis at Jamnia 20 years after the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, we have our first list of 39 books produced by Melito of Sardis around <span>AD<\/span> 170. That list included no books written after the time of Malachi, unless one is disposed to date Daniel to the second century. The Prophets and the Writings were always considered secondary to the Law. Their composition and collection was a process rather than an event in the life of the people of Israel and functioned largely as a record of the nation’s response to the Law, which was so sacred that it was kept (according to rabbinical tradition: Babylonian Talmud, <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 14a; cf. also <em>Cairo Damascus Document<\/em> 5.2) in the ark of the covenant that stood in the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle. In Deuteronomy 31:26, however, the Levites were commanded by Moses merely to put the Book of the Law beside the ark. Nevertheless, its very presence in the Holy of Holies establishes its uniqueness in relation to other OT books.<\/p>\n\n<p>The 39 books of the modern OT were originally divided into only 24, according to the uniform testimony of early Hebrew tradition. The Talmud, rabbinic literature, and probably 4 Esdras testify to this arrangement that included five books of the Law, eight Prophets, and eleven Writings (Greek—Hagiographa). Modern Hebrew Bibles reflect this tripartite arrangement that was used in the first three printed editions (Soncino, 1488; Naples, 1491–1493; Brescia, 1492–1494). The Law contained the Pentateuch in our familiar order, Genesis to Deuteronomy. The eight Prophets were Joshua, Judges, Samuel (1 and 2), Kings (1 and 2), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets (all 12), which were considered as one book and arranged in the same order as our English Bibles. The eleven books of Writings contained three of poetry (Ps, Prv, Jb), the Five Scrolls (Sg, Ru, Lam, Eccl, Est), which were read at the important feasts and arranged in the chronological order of their observance, and three of narrative or historical (Dn, Ezr-Neh, 1 and 2 Chr).<\/p>\n<p>Apart from authentic Jewish tradition, efforts were made to divide the books into 21, combining Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah. Josephus was the first to do so, in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, but he was influenced by the Greek OT, the Septuagint. Origen observed in the early third century that this arrangement also corresponded to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, as did Athanasius in the fourth, and others, including Jerome. It was dubiously concluded that the number of books in the Hebrew Bible had been divinely ordained to agree with the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet! Church fathers added their support to this coincidence, which became providence to them. All such efforts, however, are of Greek origin and have no support in Hebrew tradition.<\/p>\n<p>The oldest extant manuscripts of the complete OT in Hebrew are the Masoretic Texts, which are no earlier than the eighth century <span>AD<\/span>. Only manuscripts of individual books have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Masoretic scribes apparently laid down no rules about arrangement of books because there is no uniform order of the Latter Prophets or the Writings in early Hebrew manuscripts. Nor is the situation any different in ancient Greek translations of the Hebrew. Great diversity exists in the order of books in all three of our oldest manuscripts—Codex Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus. All the early Christian authors who profess to give the order and contents of the Hebrew Bible but who do not reflect the Hebrew tripartite division are clearly dependent on the Alexandrian order reflected in these Greek editions, rather than on the Hebrew Bible. Modern Protestant Bibles follow the order of the Latin Vulgate and the content of the Hebrew. Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint (Greek translation) contained the Apocrypha, which was never accepted by the Jews. The Roman Catholic Church includes the Apocrypha in its English translations because of the influence of the Vulgate on Catholic tradition. It is considered deuterocanonical.<\/p>\n<p>Even though no uniformity of order was maintained, the Alexandrian order, reflected in the Greek manuscripts, generally arranged books according to their subject matter—narrative, history, poetry, and prophecy, with the apocryphal books appropriately interspersed into these categories. The Hebrew division was totally ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Early Hebrew Bibles divided the text into small paragraphs and larger sections somewhat akin to our paragraphs. These were indicated by spaces left between them—three letters between the small sections and nine letters between the larger ones. The number of sections is not the same in all manuscripts. Jesus probably referred to such sections in his comment concerning the “passage about the bush” (Mk 12:26). Later, liturgical needs led to further divisions of the text for the complete reading of the Law in Babylonian synagogues in one year (54 sections) and in Palestinian synagogues in three years (154 sections). These are reflected in the lectionary cycles marked in some early Hebrew Bibles.<\/p>\n<p>The division of the text into modern chapters, done in the 13th century (c. 1228) for the Latin Vulgate by Stephen Langton, was applied to the Hebrew Bible in 1518 (Bomberg Edition), but the numbers were not given to the chapters until 1571 in the text of Montanus, a Hebrew Bible with Latin interlinear translation. The verses were introduced in Bomberg’s Great Bible of 1547–48 in which every fifth verse was designated by a Hebrew numeral 1, 5, 10, and so on. Verses were inserted into the Latin Vulgate in 1555 in the small octavo edition of Stephanus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheNewTestament\">Canon of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT was written within the period of half a century, several hundred years after the completion of the OT. Both halves of that statement would be questioned by modern critics, who would extend the time span for completion of both Testaments. The writer of this survey is confident of its truthfulness to historic fact, however, and the approach taken to canonization of both OT and NT is based solidly upon that twofold premise.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, we possess far higher certification of the OT canon than of the NT canon. We refer to the fact of our Lord’s own imprimatur by way of his use of the Hebrew Scriptures as the authoritative Word of God. Yet there is a sense in which Jesus Christ did establish the NT content or canon as well, by way of anticipation. It was he who promised, “The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” and “he will guide you into all truth” (Jn 14:26; 16:13, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>From this we can derive, in turn, the basic principle of canonicity for the NT. It is identical to that of the OT, since it narrows down to a matter of divine inspiration. Whether we think of the prophets of OT times or the apostles and their God-given associates of the New, the recognition at the very time of their writing that they were authentic spokesmen for God is what determines the intrinsic canonicity of their writing. It is altogether God’s Word only if it is God-breathed. We can be assured that the books under question were received by the church of the apostolic age precisely when they had been certified by an apostle as being thus inspired. The apparent variation, relative to geographic area, in acknowledgment of some of the NT epistles may well reflect the simple fact that this attestation was by its very nature localized at first. Conversely, that all 27 books of the now universally received NT were ultimately agreed upon is evidence that proper attestation was indeed confirmed after rigorous investigation.<\/p>\n<p>Tertullian, an outstanding Christian writer in the first two decades of the third century, was one of the first to call the Christian Scriptures the “New Testament.” That title had appeared earlier (c. 190) in a composition against Montanism, the author of which is unknown. This is significant. Its use placed the NT Scripture on a level of inspiration and authority with the OT.<\/p>\n<p>From available information, the gradual process that led to full and formal public recognition of a fixed canon of the 27 books comprising the NT takes us down into the fourth century of our era. This does not necessarily mean that these Scriptures were lacking recognition in their entirety before that time, but that a need for officially defining the canon was not pressing until then.<\/p>\n<p>Though a much shorter period of time was involved in the writing of the NT than the OT, the geographic range of its origin is far wider. This circumstance alone is sufficient to account for a lack of spontaneous or simultaneous recognition of the precise extent of the NT canon. Because of the geographic isolation of the various recipients of portions of the NT, there was bound to be some lag and uncertainty from one region to another in the acknowledgment of some of the books.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate just what did transpire in the process of canonization of the NT books, we must review the facts available to us. This will enable us to analyze <em>how<\/em> and <em>why<\/em> our early Christian forebears settled upon the 27 books in our NT.<\/p>\n<p>The historic process was a gradual and continuous one, but it will help us understand it if we subdivide the nearly three and a half centuries involved into shorter periods of time. Some speak of three major stages toward canonization. This implies, without justification, that there are readily discernible steps along the way. Others simply present a long list of the names of persons and documents involved. Such a list makes it difficult to sense any motion at all. A somewhat arbitrary breakdown into five periods will be made here, with the reminder that the spreading of the knowledge of sacred literature and the deepening consensus as to its authenticity as inspired Scripture continued uninterruptedly. The periods are:<\/p>\n<p>1. First Century<\/p>\n<li>2. First Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>3. Second Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>4. Third Century<\/li>\n<li>5. Fourth Century<\/li>\n<p>Again, without meaning to imply that these are clear-cut stages, it will be helpful to notice the major trends observable in each of the periods just identified. In the first period, of course, the various books were written, but they also began to be copied and disseminated among the churches. In the second, as they became more widely known and cherished for their contents, they began to be cited as authoritative. By the end of the third period, they held a recognized place alongside the OT as “Scripture,” and they began to be both translated into regional languages and made the subject of commentaries. During the third century <span>AD<\/span>, our fourth period, the collecting of books into a whole “New Testament” was underway, together with a sifting process that was separating them from other Christian literature. The final, or fifth, period finds the church fathers of the fourth century stating that conclusions regarding the canon have been reached that indicate acceptance by the whole church. Thus, in the most strict and formal sense of the word, the canon had become fixed. It remains to list in greater detail the forces and individuals that produced the written sources witnessing to this remarkable process through which, by God’s providence, we have inherited our NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Period One: First Century<\/h5>\n<p>The principle determining recognition of the authority of the canonical NT writings was established within the content of those writings themselves. There are repeated exhortations for public reading of the apostolic communications. At the close of his First Letter to the Thessalonians, possibly the first book of the NT to be written, Paul says, “I command you in the name of the Lord to read this letter to all the brothers and sisters” (1 Thes 5:27, <span>nlt<\/span>). Earlier in the same letter Paul commends their ready acceptance of his spoken word as “the word of God” (2:13), and in 1 Corinthians 14:37 he speaks similarly of his “writings,” insisting that his message be recognized as a commandment from the Lord himself. (See also Col 4:16; Rv 1:3.) In 2 Peter 3:15-16 Paul’s letters are included with “the other Scriptures.” Since Peter’s is a general letter, widespread knowledge of Paul’s letters is thereby implied. Highly indicative also is Paul’s usage in 1 Timothy 5:18. He follows up the formula “the Scriptures say” by a combined quotation about not muzzling an ox (Dt 25:4) and “the worker deserves his wages” (cf. Lk 10:7). Thus, an equivalence is implied between OT Scripture and a NT Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 95, Clement of Rome wrote to the Christians in Corinth using a free rendering of material from Matthew and Luke. He seems to be strongly influenced by Hebrews and is obviously familiar with Romans and Corinthians. There are also reflections of Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Two: First Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>One of the earliest NT manuscripts yet discovered, a fragment of John from Egypt known as the John Rylands papyrus, demonstrates how the writings of the apostle John were revered and copied by about <span>AD<\/span> 125, within 30 to 35 years of his death. There is evidence that within 30 years of the apostle’s death all the Gospels and Pauline letters were known and used in all those centers from which any evidence has come down to us. It is true that some of the smaller letters were being questioned as to their authority in some quarters for perhaps another 50 years, but this was due only to uncertainty about their authorship in those particular locales. This demonstrates that acceptance was not being imposed by the actions of councils but was rather happening spontaneously through a normal response on the part of those who had learned the facts about authorship. In those places where the churches were uncertain about the authorship or apostolic approval of certain books, acceptance was slower.<\/p>\n<p>The first three outstanding church fathers, Clement, Polycarp, and Ignatius, used the bulk of the material of the NT in a revealingly casual manner—authenticated Scriptures were being accepted as authoritative without argument. In the writings of these men only Mark (which closely parallels the material of Matthew), 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude are not clearly attested.<\/p>\n<p>The Epistles of Ignatius (c. <span>AD<\/span> 115) have correspondences in several places with the Gospels and seem to incorporate language from a number of the Pauline letters. The Didache (or Teaching of the Twelve), perhaps even earlier, makes references to a written Gospel. Most important is the fact that Clement, Barnabas, and Ignatius all draw a clear distinction between their own and the inspired, authoritative apostolic writings.<\/p>\n<p>It is in the Epistle of Barnabas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 130) that we first find the formula “it is written” (4:14) used in reference to a NT book (Mt 22:14). But even before this, Polycarp, who had personal acquaintance with eyewitnesses of our Lord’s ministry, used a combined OT and NT quotation. Citing Paul’s admonition in Ephesians 4:26, where the apostle quotes Psalm 4:4 and makes an addition, Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians introduces the reference by “as it is said in these Scriptures” (12:4). Then Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (c. 130–140), in a work preserved for us by Eusebius, mentions by name the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, and his use of them as the basis of exposition indicates his acceptance of them as canonical. Also around <span>AD<\/span> 140, the recently discovered Gospel of Truth (a Gnostic-oriented work probably authored by Valentinius) makes an important contribution. Its use of canonical NT sources, treating them as authoritative, is comprehensive enough to warrant the conclusion that in Rome at this period there was a NT compilation in existence corresponding very closely to our own. Citations are made from the Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul, Hebrews, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The heretic Marcion, by defining a limited canon of his own (c. 140), in effect hastened the day when the orthodox believers needed to declare themselves on this issue. Rejecting the entire OT, Marcion settled for Luke’s Gospel (eliminating chapters 1 and 2 as too Jewish) and Paul’s letters (except for the pastoral ones). Interestingly, especially in the light of Colossians 4:16, he substitutes the name “Laodiceans” for Ephesians.<\/p>\n<p>Near the end of this period, Justin Martyr, in describing the worship services of the early church, puts the apostolic writings on a par with those of the OT prophets. He states that the voice which spoke through the apostles of Christ in the NT was the same as that which spoke through the prophets—the voice of God—and the same voice that Abraham heard, responding in faith and obedience. Justin was also free in his use of “it is written” with quotations from NT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Three: Second Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>Irenaeus had been privileged to begin his Christian training under Polycarp, a disciple of apostles. Then, as a presbyter in Lyons, he had association with Bishop Pothinus, whose own background also included contact with firstgeneration Christians. Irenaeus quotes from almost all the NT on the basis of its authority and asserts that the apostles were endowed with power from on high. They were, he says, “fully informed concerning all things, and had a perfect knowledge . . . having indeed all in equal measure and each one singly the Gospel of God” (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 3.3). Irenaeus gives reasons why there should be four Gospels. “The word,” he says, “gave us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.” In addition to the Gospels, he makes reference also to Acts, all the letters of Paul except Philemon, 1 Peter, 1 John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Tatian, pupil of Justin Martyr, made a harmony of the four Gospels, the <em>Diatessaron,<\/em> attesting to the equal status they had in the church by <span>AD<\/span> 170. Other “gospels” had come into existence by then, but he recognized only the four. Also dating from about 170 was the <em>Muratorian Canon.<\/em> An eighth-century copy of this document was discovered and published in 1740 by librarian L. A. Muratori. The manuscript is mutilated at both ends, but the remaining text makes it evident that Matthew and Mark were included in the now missing part. The fragment begins with Luke and John, cites Acts, 13 Pauline letters, 1 and 2 John, Jude, and Revelation. There follows a statement, “We accept only the Apocalypse of John and Peter, although some of us do not want it [Apocalypse of Peter is 2 Peter?] to be read in the Church.” The list goes on to reject by name various heretical leaders and their writings.<\/p>\n<p>Translated versions existed by this period. In the form of Syriac and Old Latin translations we secure, by <span>AD<\/span> 170, adequate witness from the extreme eastern and western branches of the church, as we might well expect from the other evidence in hand. The NT canon is represented with no additions and the omission of only one book, 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Four: Third Century<\/h5>\n<p>The outstanding Christian name of the third century is that of Origen (<span>AD<\/span> 185– 254). A prodigious scholar and interpreter, he made critical studies of the NT text (alongside his work on the <em>Hexapla<\/em>) and wrote commentaries and homilies on most of the books of the NT, emphasizing their inspiration by God.<\/p>\n<p>Dionysius of Alexandria, pupil of Origen, indicates that while the Western church accepted the book of Revelation from the first, its position in the East was variable. In the case of the Letter to the Hebrews, the situation was reversed. It proved to be more insecure in the West than in the East. When it comes to other contested books (note, incidently, that all in that category have the hindmost position in our present Bibles—Hebrews to Revelation), among the so-called “Catholic Epistles” Dionysius supports James and 2 and 3 John but not 2 Peter or Jude. In other words, even at the end of the third century there was the same lack of finality about certain books as at its beginning.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Five: Fourth Century<\/h5>\n<p>Early in this period, the picture begins to clarify. Eusebius (<span>AD<\/span> 270–340, bishop of Caesarea before 315), the great church historian, sets forth his estimate of the canon in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> (3.3–25). Herein he makes a straightforward statement on the status of the canon in the early part of the fourth century: (1) Universally agreed upon as canonical were the four Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul (including Hebrews, with question about his authorship), 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. (2) Admitted by a majority, including Eusebius himself, but disputed by some were James, 2 Peter (the most strongly contested), 2 and 3 John, and Jude. (3) The Acts of Paul, the Didache, and Shepherd of Hermas were classified “spurious,” and still other writings were listed as “heretical and absurd.”<\/p>\n<p>It is in the latter half of the fourth century, however, that the NT canon finds full and final declaration. In his <em>Festal Letter<\/em> for Easter, 367, Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria included information designed to eliminate once and for all the use of certain apocryphal books. This letter, with its admonition, “Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away,” gives us the earliest extant document that specifies our 27 books without qualification. At the close of the century, the Council of Carthage (<span>AD<\/span> 397) decreed that “aside from the canonical Scriptures nothing is to be read in church under the Name of Divine Scriptures.” This, too, lists the 27 books of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The sudden advance of Christianity under Emperor Constantine (Edict of Milan, 313) had a great deal to do with the reception of all the NT books in the East. When he assigned Eusebius the task of preparing “fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures,” the historian, fully aware of which were the sacred books for which many believers had been willing to lay down their very lives, in effect established the standard that gave recognition to all of the once-doubtful books. In the West, of course, Jerome and Augustine were the leaders who exercised a determinitive influence. Publication of the 27 books in the Vulgate version virtually settled the matter.<\/p>\n<h5>Principles and Factors Determining the Canon<\/h5>\n<p>By its very nature, Holy Scripture, whether OT or NT, is a production given of God, not the work of human creation. The key to canonicity is divine inspiration. Therefore, the method of determination is not one of selection from a number of possible candidates (there are no other candidates, in actuality) but one of reception of authentic material and its consequent recognition by an ever-widening circle as the facts of its origin become known.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, the movement of Montanus, which was declared heretical by the church of his day (mid-second century), was an impetus toward the recognition of a closed canon of the written Word of God. He taught that the prophetic gift was permanently granted to the church and that he himself was a prophet. The pressure to deal with Montanism, therefore, intensified the search for a basic authority, and apostolic authorship or approval became recognized as the only sure standard for identifying God’s revelation. Even within the Scripture record, first-century prophets were subordinate and subject to apostolic authority (see, for example, 1 Cor 14:29-30; Eph 4:11).<\/p>\n<p>When all things were being reexamined in the Protestant Reformation, some of the Reformers sought means of reassuring themselves and their followers about the canon of Scripture. This was in some ways an unfortunate aspect of Reformation thinking, because once God in his providence had determined for his people the fixed content of Scripture, that became a fact of history and was not a repeatable process. Nevertheless, Luther established a theological test for the books of the Bible (and questioned some of them)—“Do they teach Christ?” Equally subjective, it would seem, was Calvin’s insistence that the Spirit of God bears witness to each individual Christian in any age of church history as to what is his Word and what is not.<\/p>\n<p>Actually, even for the initial acceptance of the written Word, it is neither safe nor sound (as far as Scripture or history teaches us) to say that recognition and reception was an intuitive matter. It was rather a matter of simple obedience to the known commands of Christ and his apostles. As we saw at the outset, our Lord promised (Jn 14:26; 16:13) to communicate all things necessary through his agents. The apostles were conscious of this responsibility and agency as they wrote. Paul’s explanation in 1 Corinthians 2:13 is apropos: “In telling you about these gifts we have even used the very words given to us by the Holy Spirit, not words that we as men might choose. So we use the Holy Spirit’s words to explain the Holy Spirit’s facts” (<span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Hence, the early church, with closer ties and greater information than is available to us today, examined the testimony of the ancients. They were able to discern which were the authentic and authoritative books by their apostolic origin. Mark’s association with Peter, and Luke’s with Paul, gave them such apostolic approval, and epistles like Hebrews and Jude were also tied in with the apostolic message and ministry. Incontrovertible consistency of doctrine in all the books, including the sometime contested ones, was perhaps a subordinate test. But historically the procedure was essentially one of acceptance and approval of those books that were vouched for by knowledgeable church leaders. Full acceptance by the original recipients followed by a continued acknowledgment and use is an essential factor in the development of the canon.<\/p>\n<p>The church’s concept of canon, derived first of all from the reverence given the OT Scriptures, rested in the conviction that the apostles were uniquely authorized to speak in the name of the one who possessed all authority—the Lord Jesus Christ. The development from there is logical and straightforward. Those who heard Jesus in person were immediately subject to his authority. He personally authenticated his words to the believers. These same believers knew that Jesus authorized his apostles to speak in his name, both during and (more significantly) after his earthly ministry. Apostolic speaking on behalf of Christ was recognized in the church, whether in personal utterance or in written form. Both the spoken word of an apostle and the letter of an apostle constituted the word of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The generation that followed that of the apostles themselves received the witness of those who knew that the apostles had the right to speak and write in the name of Christ. Consequently, the second and third generation of Christians looked back to apostolic words (writings) as the very words of Christ. This is what is really meant by canonization—recognition of the divinely authenticated Word. Hence, the believers (the church) did not establish the canon but simply bore witness to its extent by recognizing the authority of the word of Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, C<span>anon of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato, Aristotle, and Homer form a canon of Greek literature, so the NT books became the canon of Christian literature. The criteria for selecting the books in the Jewish canon (the OT) are not known but clearly had to do with their worth in the ongoing life and religion of the worshiping nation. The criteria of the selection of NT books revolved around their “apostolicity,” according to early church writers. Like those of the OT, these books were collected and preserved by local churches in the continuing process of their worship and need for authoritative guidance for Christian living. The formation of the canon was a process, rather than an event, that took several hundred years to reach finality in all parts of the Roman Empire. Local canons were the basis for comparison, and out of them eventually emerged the general canon that exists in Christendom today, although some of the Eastern churches have a NT that is slightly smaller than that accepted in the West. Judaism, as well as Christianity as a whole, believes that the Spirit of God was operative in some providential way in the production and preservation of his Word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheOldTestament\">Canon of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament is a name that does not appear in Jewish literature. Jews prefer to call their collection of Scriptures the TANAK—an acronym formed from the first letters of <em>Torah<\/em> (Law), <em>Nevi<\/em><em>’<\/em><em>im<\/em> (Prophets), and <em>Kethubim<\/em> (Writings). In Luke 24:44 (<span>niv<\/span>), these are called the “Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (the first book of the Writings in the Hebrew Bible). Christians called their collection of writings the New Testament, or covenant, the latter term being a designation earlier used of the agreement God made with Abraham and the patriarchs, which was repeated by Christ to his apostles (Mt 26:28). Christians in the first century considered their new covenant from Christ (1 Cor 11:25) to be a continuation of the one made earlier with the patriarchs (Eph 2:12), spoken of by the prophets (Jer 31:31-34), and which was therefore called a former covenant (Heb 8:7-13; 9:1, 15-22) or in later centuries the OT. The terms “Old” and “New” do not appear in the apostolic fathers of the first and second century or in the apologists of the early- to mid-second century, but they do appear in the latter half of the second century in Justin Martyr (<em>Dialogues<\/em> 11:2), Irenaeus (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 4.9.1), and Clement of Alexandria (<em>Stromata<\/em> 1:5). In these authors the expression referred more to the covenant itself than to the books containing it, though the transfer was eventually made. The term “canon” was not used in the OT or NT to refer to the Jewish Scriptures. The idea of limitation inherent in the word was not appropriate to the nature of religious authority in Jewish religion during the thousand years when the OT books were being written. Only the Torah was conceived as incapable of being added to or taken from (Dt 4:2). Jewish religion existed for a millennium, from Moses to Malachi, without a closed canon, i.e., an exclusive list of authoritative books. Never in their history did the people of the OT have the entire 39 books of the OT. When their canon was closed is not known. Although some questions were being asked about religious authority by rabbis at Jamnia 20 years after the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, we have our first list of 39 books produced by Melito of Sardis around <span>AD<\/span> 170. That list included no books written after the time of Malachi, unless one is disposed to date Daniel to the second century. The Prophets and the Writings were always considered secondary to the Law. Their composition and collection was a process rather than an event in the life of the people of Israel and functioned largely as a record of the nation’s response to the Law, which was so sacred that it was kept (according to rabbinical tradition: Babylonian Talmud, <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 14a; cf. also <em>Cairo Damascus Document<\/em> 5.2) in the ark of the covenant that stood in the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle. In Deuteronomy 31:26, however, the Levites were commanded by Moses merely to put the Book of the Law beside the ark. Nevertheless, its very presence in the Holy of Holies establishes its uniqueness in relation to other OT books.<\/p>\n\n<p>The 39 books of the modern OT were originally divided into only 24, according to the uniform testimony of early Hebrew tradition. The Talmud, rabbinic literature, and probably 4 Esdras testify to this arrangement that included five books of the Law, eight Prophets, and eleven Writings (Greek—Hagiographa). Modern Hebrew Bibles reflect this tripartite arrangement that was used in the first three printed editions (Soncino, 1488; Naples, 1491–1493; Brescia, 1492–1494). The Law contained the Pentateuch in our familiar order, Genesis to Deuteronomy. The eight Prophets were Joshua, Judges, Samuel (1 and 2), Kings (1 and 2), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets (all 12), which were considered as one book and arranged in the same order as our English Bibles. The eleven books of Writings contained three of poetry (Ps, Prv, Jb), the Five Scrolls (Sg, Ru, Lam, Eccl, Est), which were read at the important feasts and arranged in the chronological order of their observance, and three of narrative or historical (Dn, Ezr-Neh, 1 and 2 Chr).<\/p>\n<p>Apart from authentic Jewish tradition, efforts were made to divide the books into 21, combining Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah. Josephus was the first to do so, in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, but he was influenced by the Greek OT, the Septuagint. Origen observed in the early third century that this arrangement also corresponded to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, as did Athanasius in the fourth, and others, including Jerome. It was dubiously concluded that the number of books in the Hebrew Bible had been divinely ordained to agree with the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet! Church fathers added their support to this coincidence, which became providence to them. All such efforts, however, are of Greek origin and have no support in Hebrew tradition.<\/p>\n<p>The oldest extant manuscripts of the complete OT in Hebrew are the Masoretic Texts, which are no earlier than the eighth century <span>AD<\/span>. Only manuscripts of individual books have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Masoretic scribes apparently laid down no rules about arrangement of books because there is no uniform order of the Latter Prophets or the Writings in early Hebrew manuscripts. Nor is the situation any different in ancient Greek translations of the Hebrew. Great diversity exists in the order of books in all three of our oldest manuscripts—Codex Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus. All the early Christian authors who profess to give the order and contents of the Hebrew Bible but who do not reflect the Hebrew tripartite division are clearly dependent on the Alexandrian order reflected in these Greek editions, rather than on the Hebrew Bible. Modern Protestant Bibles follow the order of the Latin Vulgate and the content of the Hebrew. Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint (Greek translation) contained the Apocrypha, which was never accepted by the Jews. The Roman Catholic Church includes the Apocrypha in its English translations because of the influence of the Vulgate on Catholic tradition. It is considered deuterocanonical.<\/p>\n<p>Even though no uniformity of order was maintained, the Alexandrian order, reflected in the Greek manuscripts, generally arranged books according to their subject matter—narrative, history, poetry, and prophecy, with the apocryphal books appropriately interspersed into these categories. The Hebrew division was totally ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Early Hebrew Bibles divided the text into small paragraphs and larger sections somewhat akin to our paragraphs. These were indicated by spaces left between them—three letters between the small sections and nine letters between the larger ones. The number of sections is not the same in all manuscripts. Jesus probably referred to such sections in his comment concerning the “passage about the bush” (Mk 12:26). Later, liturgical needs led to further divisions of the text for the complete reading of the Law in Babylonian synagogues in one year (54 sections) and in Palestinian synagogues in three years (154 sections). These are reflected in the lectionary cycles marked in some early Hebrew Bibles.<\/p>\n<p>The division of the text into modern chapters, done in the 13th century (c. 1228) for the Latin Vulgate by Stephen Langton, was applied to the Hebrew Bible in 1518 (Bomberg Edition), but the numbers were not given to the chapters until 1571 in the text of Montanus, a Hebrew Bible with Latin interlinear translation. The verses were introduced in Bomberg’s Great Bible of 1547–48 in which every fifth verse was designated by a Hebrew numeral 1, 5, 10, and so on. Verses were inserted into the Latin Vulgate in 1555 in the small octavo edition of Stephanus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CanonoftheNewTestament\">Canon of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT was written within the period of half a century, several hundred years after the completion of the OT. Both halves of that statement would be questioned by modern critics, who would extend the time span for completion of both Testaments. The writer of this survey is confident of its truthfulness to historic fact, however, and the approach taken to canonization of both OT and NT is based solidly upon that twofold premise.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, we possess far higher certification of the OT canon than of the NT canon. We refer to the fact of our Lord’s own imprimatur by way of his use of the Hebrew Scriptures as the authoritative Word of God. Yet there is a sense in which Jesus Christ did establish the NT content or canon as well, by way of anticipation. It was he who promised, “The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” and “he will guide you into all truth” (Jn 14:26; 16:13, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>From this we can derive, in turn, the basic principle of canonicity for the NT. It is identical to that of the OT, since it narrows down to a matter of divine inspiration. Whether we think of the prophets of OT times or the apostles and their God-given associates of the New, the recognition at the very time of their writing that they were authentic spokesmen for God is what determines the intrinsic canonicity of their writing. It is altogether God’s Word only if it is God-breathed. We can be assured that the books under question were received by the church of the apostolic age precisely when they had been certified by an apostle as being thus inspired. The apparent variation, relative to geographic area, in acknowledgment of some of the NT epistles may well reflect the simple fact that this attestation was by its very nature localized at first. Conversely, that all 27 books of the now universally received NT were ultimately agreed upon is evidence that proper attestation was indeed confirmed after rigorous investigation.<\/p>\n<p>Tertullian, an outstanding Christian writer in the first two decades of the third century, was one of the first to call the Christian Scriptures the “New Testament.” That title had appeared earlier (c. 190) in a composition against Montanism, the author of which is unknown. This is significant. Its use placed the NT Scripture on a level of inspiration and authority with the OT.<\/p>\n<p>From available information, the gradual process that led to full and formal public recognition of a fixed canon of the 27 books comprising the NT takes us down into the fourth century of our era. This does not necessarily mean that these Scriptures were lacking recognition in their entirety before that time, but that a need for officially defining the canon was not pressing until then.<\/p>\n<p>Though a much shorter period of time was involved in the writing of the NT than the OT, the geographic range of its origin is far wider. This circumstance alone is sufficient to account for a lack of spontaneous or simultaneous recognition of the precise extent of the NT canon. Because of the geographic isolation of the various recipients of portions of the NT, there was bound to be some lag and uncertainty from one region to another in the acknowledgment of some of the books.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate just what did transpire in the process of canonization of the NT books, we must review the facts available to us. This will enable us to analyze <em>how<\/em> and <em>why<\/em> our early Christian forebears settled upon the 27 books in our NT.<\/p>\n<p>The historic process was a gradual and continuous one, but it will help us understand it if we subdivide the nearly three and a half centuries involved into shorter periods of time. Some speak of three major stages toward canonization. This implies, without justification, that there are readily discernible steps along the way. Others simply present a long list of the names of persons and documents involved. Such a list makes it difficult to sense any motion at all. A somewhat arbitrary breakdown into five periods will be made here, with the reminder that the spreading of the knowledge of sacred literature and the deepening consensus as to its authenticity as inspired Scripture continued uninterruptedly. The periods are:<\/p>\n<p>1. First Century<\/p>\n<li>2. First Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>3. Second Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>4. Third Century<\/li>\n<li>5. Fourth Century<\/li>\n<p>Again, without meaning to imply that these are clear-cut stages, it will be helpful to notice the major trends observable in each of the periods just identified. In the first period, of course, the various books were written, but they also began to be copied and disseminated among the churches. In the second, as they became more widely known and cherished for their contents, they began to be cited as authoritative. By the end of the third period, they held a recognized place alongside the OT as “Scripture,” and they began to be both translated into regional languages and made the subject of commentaries. During the third century <span>AD<\/span>, our fourth period, the collecting of books into a whole “New Testament” was underway, together with a sifting process that was separating them from other Christian literature. The final, or fifth, period finds the church fathers of the fourth century stating that conclusions regarding the canon have been reached that indicate acceptance by the whole church. Thus, in the most strict and formal sense of the word, the canon had become fixed. It remains to list in greater detail the forces and individuals that produced the written sources witnessing to this remarkable process through which, by God’s providence, we have inherited our NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Period One: First Century<\/h5>\n<p>The principle determining recognition of the authority of the canonical NT writings was established within the content of those writings themselves. There are repeated exhortations for public reading of the apostolic communications. At the close of his First Letter to the Thessalonians, possibly the first book of the NT to be written, Paul says, “I command you in the name of the Lord to read this letter to all the brothers and sisters” (1 Thes 5:27, <span>nlt<\/span>). Earlier in the same letter Paul commends their ready acceptance of his spoken word as “the word of God” (2:13), and in 1 Corinthians 14:37 he speaks similarly of his “writings,” insisting that his message be recognized as a commandment from the Lord himself. (See also Col 4:16; Rv 1:3.) In 2 Peter 3:15-16 Paul’s letters are included with “the other Scriptures.” Since Peter’s is a general letter, widespread knowledge of Paul’s letters is thereby implied. Highly indicative also is Paul’s usage in 1 Timothy 5:18. He follows up the formula “the Scriptures say” by a combined quotation about not muzzling an ox (Dt 25:4) and “the worker deserves his wages” (cf. Lk 10:7). Thus, an equivalence is implied between OT Scripture and a NT Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 95, Clement of Rome wrote to the Christians in Corinth using a free rendering of material from Matthew and Luke. He seems to be strongly influenced by Hebrews and is obviously familiar with Romans and Corinthians. There are also reflections of Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Two: First Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>One of the earliest NT manuscripts yet discovered, a fragment of John from Egypt known as the John Rylands papyrus, demonstrates how the writings of the apostle John were revered and copied by about <span>AD<\/span> 125, within 30 to 35 years of his death. There is evidence that within 30 years of the apostle’s death all the Gospels and Pauline letters were known and used in all those centers from which any evidence has come down to us. It is true that some of the smaller letters were being questioned as to their authority in some quarters for perhaps another 50 years, but this was due only to uncertainty about their authorship in those particular locales. This demonstrates that acceptance was not being imposed by the actions of councils but was rather happening spontaneously through a normal response on the part of those who had learned the facts about authorship. In those places where the churches were uncertain about the authorship or apostolic approval of certain books, acceptance was slower.<\/p>\n<p>The first three outstanding church fathers, Clement, Polycarp, and Ignatius, used the bulk of the material of the NT in a revealingly casual manner—authenticated Scriptures were being accepted as authoritative without argument. In the writings of these men only Mark (which closely parallels the material of Matthew), 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude are not clearly attested.<\/p>\n<p>The Epistles of Ignatius (c. <span>AD<\/span> 115) have correspondences in several places with the Gospels and seem to incorporate language from a number of the Pauline letters. The Didache (or Teaching of the Twelve), perhaps even earlier, makes references to a written Gospel. Most important is the fact that Clement, Barnabas, and Ignatius all draw a clear distinction between their own and the inspired, authoritative apostolic writings.<\/p>\n<p>It is in the Epistle of Barnabas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 130) that we first find the formula “it is written” (4:14) used in reference to a NT book (Mt 22:14). But even before this, Polycarp, who had personal acquaintance with eyewitnesses of our Lord’s ministry, used a combined OT and NT quotation. Citing Paul’s admonition in Ephesians 4:26, where the apostle quotes Psalm 4:4 and makes an addition, Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians introduces the reference by “as it is said in these Scriptures” (12:4). Then Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (c. 130–140), in a work preserved for us by Eusebius, mentions by name the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, and his use of them as the basis of exposition indicates his acceptance of them as canonical. Also around <span>AD<\/span> 140, the recently discovered Gospel of Truth (a Gnostic-oriented work probably authored by Valentinius) makes an important contribution. Its use of canonical NT sources, treating them as authoritative, is comprehensive enough to warrant the conclusion that in Rome at this period there was a NT compilation in existence corresponding very closely to our own. Citations are made from the Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul, Hebrews, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The heretic Marcion, by defining a limited canon of his own (c. 140), in effect hastened the day when the orthodox believers needed to declare themselves on this issue. Rejecting the entire OT, Marcion settled for Luke’s Gospel (eliminating chapters 1 and 2 as too Jewish) and Paul’s letters (except for the pastoral ones). Interestingly, especially in the light of Colossians 4:16, he substitutes the name “Laodiceans” for Ephesians.<\/p>\n<p>Near the end of this period, Justin Martyr, in describing the worship services of the early church, puts the apostolic writings on a par with those of the OT prophets. He states that the voice which spoke through the apostles of Christ in the NT was the same as that which spoke through the prophets—the voice of God—and the same voice that Abraham heard, responding in faith and obedience. Justin was also free in his use of “it is written” with quotations from NT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Three: Second Half of Second Century<\/h5>\n<p>Irenaeus had been privileged to begin his Christian training under Polycarp, a disciple of apostles. Then, as a presbyter in Lyons, he had association with Bishop Pothinus, whose own background also included contact with firstgeneration Christians. Irenaeus quotes from almost all the NT on the basis of its authority and asserts that the apostles were endowed with power from on high. They were, he says, “fully informed concerning all things, and had a perfect knowledge . . . having indeed all in equal measure and each one singly the Gospel of God” (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 3.3). Irenaeus gives reasons why there should be four Gospels. “The word,” he says, “gave us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.” In addition to the Gospels, he makes reference also to Acts, all the letters of Paul except Philemon, 1 Peter, 1 John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Tatian, pupil of Justin Martyr, made a harmony of the four Gospels, the <em>Diatessaron,<\/em> attesting to the equal status they had in the church by <span>AD<\/span> 170. Other “gospels” had come into existence by then, but he recognized only the four. Also dating from about 170 was the <em>Muratorian Canon.<\/em> An eighth-century copy of this document was discovered and published in 1740 by librarian L. A. Muratori. The manuscript is mutilated at both ends, but the remaining text makes it evident that Matthew and Mark were included in the now missing part. The fragment begins with Luke and John, cites Acts, 13 Pauline letters, 1 and 2 John, Jude, and Revelation. There follows a statement, “We accept only the Apocalypse of John and Peter, although some of us do not want it [Apocalypse of Peter is 2 Peter?] to be read in the Church.” The list goes on to reject by name various heretical leaders and their writings.<\/p>\n<p>Translated versions existed by this period. In the form of Syriac and Old Latin translations we secure, by <span>AD<\/span> 170, adequate witness from the extreme eastern and western branches of the church, as we might well expect from the other evidence in hand. The NT canon is represented with no additions and the omission of only one book, 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Four: Third Century<\/h5>\n<p>The outstanding Christian name of the third century is that of Origen (<span>AD<\/span> 185– 254). A prodigious scholar and interpreter, he made critical studies of the NT text (alongside his work on the <em>Hexapla<\/em>) and wrote commentaries and homilies on most of the books of the NT, emphasizing their inspiration by God.<\/p>\n<p>Dionysius of Alexandria, pupil of Origen, indicates that while the Western church accepted the book of Revelation from the first, its position in the East was variable. In the case of the Letter to the Hebrews, the situation was reversed. It proved to be more insecure in the West than in the East. When it comes to other contested books (note, incidently, that all in that category have the hindmost position in our present Bibles—Hebrews to Revelation), among the so-called “Catholic Epistles” Dionysius supports James and 2 and 3 John but not 2 Peter or Jude. In other words, even at the end of the third century there was the same lack of finality about certain books as at its beginning.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Five: Fourth Century<\/h5>\n<p>Early in this period, the picture begins to clarify. Eusebius (<span>AD<\/span> 270–340, bishop of Caesarea before 315), the great church historian, sets forth his estimate of the canon in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> (3.3–25). Herein he makes a straightforward statement on the status of the canon in the early part of the fourth century: (1) Universally agreed upon as canonical were the four Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul (including Hebrews, with question about his authorship), 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. (2) Admitted by a majority, including Eusebius himself, but disputed by some were James, 2 Peter (the most strongly contested), 2 and 3 John, and Jude. (3) The Acts of Paul, the Didache, and Shepherd of Hermas were classified “spurious,” and still other writings were listed as “heretical and absurd.”<\/p>\n<p>It is in the latter half of the fourth century, however, that the NT canon finds full and final declaration. In his <em>Festal Letter<\/em> for Easter, 367, Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria included information designed to eliminate once and for all the use of certain apocryphal books. This letter, with its admonition, “Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away,” gives us the earliest extant document that specifies our 27 books without qualification. At the close of the century, the Council of Carthage (<span>AD<\/span> 397) decreed that “aside from the canonical Scriptures nothing is to be read in church under the Name of Divine Scriptures.” This, too, lists the 27 books of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The sudden advance of Christianity under Emperor Constantine (Edict of Milan, 313) had a great deal to do with the reception of all the NT books in the East. When he assigned Eusebius the task of preparing “fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures,” the historian, fully aware of which were the sacred books for which many believers had been willing to lay down their very lives, in effect established the standard that gave recognition to all of the once-doubtful books. In the West, of course, Jerome and Augustine were the leaders who exercised a determinitive influence. Publication of the 27 books in the Vulgate version virtually settled the matter.<\/p>\n<h5>Principles and Factors Determining the Canon<\/h5>\n<p>By its very nature, Holy Scripture, whether OT or NT, is a production given of God, not the work of human creation. The key to canonicity is divine inspiration. Therefore, the method of determination is not one of selection from a number of possible candidates (there are no other candidates, in actuality) but one of reception of authentic material and its consequent recognition by an ever-widening circle as the facts of its origin become known.<\/p>\n<p>In a sense, the movement of Montanus, which was declared heretical by the church of his day (mid-second century), was an impetus toward the recognition of a closed canon of the written Word of God. He taught that the prophetic gift was permanently granted to the church and that he himself was a prophet. The pressure to deal with Montanism, therefore, intensified the search for a basic authority, and apostolic authorship or approval became recognized as the only sure standard for identifying God’s revelation. Even within the Scripture record, first-century prophets were subordinate and subject to apostolic authority (see, for example, 1 Cor 14:29-30; Eph 4:11).<\/p>\n<p>When all things were being reexamined in the Protestant Reformation, some of the Reformers sought means of reassuring themselves and their followers about the canon of Scripture. This was in some ways an unfortunate aspect of Reformation thinking, because once God in his providence had determined for his people the fixed content of Scripture, that became a fact of history and was not a repeatable process. Nevertheless, Luther established a theological test for the books of the Bible (and questioned some of them)—“Do they teach Christ?” Equally subjective, it would seem, was Calvin’s insistence that the Spirit of God bears witness to each individual Christian in any age of church history as to what is his Word and what is not.<\/p>\n<p>Actually, even for the initial acceptance of the written Word, it is neither safe nor sound (as far as Scripture or history teaches us) to say that recognition and reception was an intuitive matter. It was rather a matter of simple obedience to the known commands of Christ and his apostles. As we saw at the outset, our Lord promised (Jn 14:26; 16:13) to communicate all things necessary through his agents. The apostles were conscious of this responsibility and agency as they wrote. Paul’s explanation in 1 Corinthians 2:13 is apropos: “In telling you about these gifts we have even used the very words given to us by the Holy Spirit, not words that we as men might choose. So we use the Holy Spirit’s words to explain the Holy Spirit’s facts” (<span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Hence, the early church, with closer ties and greater information than is available to us today, examined the testimony of the ancients. They were able to discern which were the authentic and authoritative books by their apostolic origin. Mark’s association with Peter, and Luke’s with Paul, gave them such apostolic approval, and epistles like Hebrews and Jude were also tied in with the apostolic message and ministry. Incontrovertible consistency of doctrine in all the books, including the sometime contested ones, was perhaps a subordinate test. But historically the procedure was essentially one of acceptance and approval of those books that were vouched for by knowledgeable church leaders. Full acceptance by the original recipients followed by a continued acknowledgment and use is an essential factor in the development of the canon.<\/p>\n<p>The church’s concept of canon, derived first of all from the reverence given the OT Scriptures, rested in the conviction that the apostles were uniquely authorized to speak in the name of the one who possessed all authority—the Lord Jesus Christ. The development from there is logical and straightforward. Those who heard Jesus in person were immediately subject to his authority. He personally authenticated his words to the believers. These same believers knew that Jesus authorized his apostles to speak in his name, both during and (more significantly) after his earthly ministry. Apostolic speaking on behalf of Christ was recognized in the church, whether in personal utterance or in written form. Both the spoken word of an apostle and the letter of an apostle constituted the word of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The generation that followed that of the apostles themselves received the witness of those who knew that the apostles had the right to speak and write in the name of Christ. Consequently, the second and third generation of Christians looked back to apostolic words (writings) as the very words of Christ. This is what is really meant by canonization—recognition of the divinely authenticated Word. Hence, the believers (the church) did not establish the canon but simply bore witness to its extent by recognizing the authority of the word of Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Canon of the Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Canon of the Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5258,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blood","title_en":"Blood","content_ro":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","summary_en":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5423,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Body of Christ","title_en":"Body of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BODY OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePhysicalBodyofJesusChrist\">The Physical Body of Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary (Mt 1:20); the one thus born, humanly speaking, as a descendant of David (Rom 1:3), was also to be called the Son of God (Lk 1:35). The apostle John emphasized that the body of Christ was really human physically, not something gaseous or ethereal (1 Jn 4:2-3) as some persons in John’s day were already beginning to argue. God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14; cf. Is 53:1-4). Jesus’ earthly body possessed ordinary human characteristics and limitations. That is, as a real human being, Jesus Christ experienced sorrow (Jn 11:35; Heb 5:7-8), weariness (Jn 4:6), thirst (19:28), and pain (vv 1-3).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus gave up his spirit, his physical body died on the cross (Jn 19:30, 33). The NT proclaims that he bore the sins of the world in his body on the cross (1 Pt 2:24; 1 Jn 2:2; cf. Is 53:5-6). His death is described as a perfect sacrifice for sinners (Heb 9:12-14, 26-28), a sacrifice of his body that makes believers in him holy and righteous (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 10:10).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s physical body was prepared in the normal way for burial (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53, 56; 24:1; Jn 19:39-40) and placed in the rock tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:41). On the third day the body of Christ experienced a real physical resurrection, as he had predicted (Jn 2:19-22). He was seen in his physical resurrection body (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:10-19, 26). He was heard, touched, and held onto (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17; 1 Jn 1:1). He offered his body, scarred by his crucifixion, to be touched (Lk 24:39; Jn 20:17). The fact that he ate shows that his resurrection body was a physical one (Lk 24:42-43). In addition, Christ’s body was “glorified,” that is, it was not restricted as ordinary bodies are: he entered and left rooms in a remarkable way (Lk 24:31, 36; Jn 20:19, 26). Christ’s bodily resurrection is said in Scripture to guarantee that believers in Christ will experience resurrection of their own bodies (1 Cor 15:20-23, 50-57; Phil 3:20-21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristintheLordsSupper\">The Body of Christ in the Lord’s Supper<\/p>\n<p>At the last supper (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:15-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which accompanied the Passover supper, Jesus held up a loaf of bread and said, “This is my body”; then he picked up a cup of wine and said, “This is my blood of the covenant” (Mt 26:26, 28). Jesus meant that the bread symbolized his body, which would be broken when he was beaten at his trial and pierced at his crucifixion (Lk 23:33; Jn 19:1-2). The apostle Paul said that Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed for us (1 Cor 5:7), meaning that the Passover lamb in the OT was an object lesson pointing to “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>For Christians, the body of Christ is viewed symbolically as a broken body (Mt 8:17; 1 Pt 2:24; cf. Is 53:4-5) in the breaking of the bread at the Lord’s Supper. The cup is a sign of his blood poured out, viewed as the central factor in God’s covenant of grace with his people. Jesus referred to “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20). The whole ceremony of the Lord’s Supper was also to be a memorial (1 Cor 11:25-26). In the ceremony believers are reminded that Christ died for sinners, that is, for the forgiveness of their sins (Mt 26:28). They are also reminded that they are participating in the body of Christ in that they are united with him (Rom 6:1-11; 1 Cor 10:16; Gal 2:20; Phil 3:10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBodyofChristthePeopleofGod\">The Body of Christ, the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “body of Christ” is also used as a metaphor for the whole church, a unity of believers connected with and dependent on Christ. God’s people are thus said to be members of Christ’s “mystical body” (1 Cor 12:27), in fellowship with Christ and spiritually nourished by him (Eph 5:25, 29). A number of other metaphors are also used for the whole people of God, such as the vine (Ps 80:8), temple of God (1 Cor 3:16-17), building (1 Pt 2:5), chosen people (v 9), and family of God (Eph 3:15). Such metaphors amplify the interrelatedness, communion, and dependence of the “body of Christ” upon the living God.<\/p>\n<p>The term “body of Christ” was often used by Paul to remind a local church that it was a vital part of the larger body. Paul said to the church at Rome, “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom 12:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Paul taught the Corinthian Christians that they, individually and collectively, were part of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27). They and Paul were all baptized by one Spirit into that one body (Eph 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>In a number of passages written by Paul, the church is called the “body” and Christ the “head” (Col 1:18). Christ has been made “head over all things for the church,” which “is his body” (Eph 1:22-23). The body grows by “holding fast to the Head” (Col 2:19). As head of the body, Christ is its Savior (Eph 5:23). The head\/body metaphor stresses the organic dependence of the church on Christ and his lordship over the church. The church finds its self-understanding in terms of its Head. The relationship is organic in that the life flows from, and is sustained by, the Head. The relationship is immediate, direct, and complete. Apart from Christ, both in his historic atoning sacrifice and in his present position at the right hand of God, the church has no existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the term “body of Christ” is used to mean both the universal church and each local group of believers. In both senses the church is said to be the spiritual body in which believing Jews and Gentiles are united (Eph 2:14-16; 3:6; 4:4). It is the body that Christ redeemed (Eph 5:23), over which he presides (Col 1:18) and sovereignly rules (Eph 1:22-23) and for which he supplies strength and unity (Eph 4:15-16; Col 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>Each member of the body of Christ has been given spiritual gifts with which to serve Christ in the body (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11). Such gifts are enumerated several times in Scripture, and range from apostleship and pastoring to encouraging and showing mercy (Rom 12:7-8; Eph 4:11). The ministry of serving is to be shared by all Christians, for example, through giving to the physical needs of others (Acts 11:29-30; 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:1-5) and praying for one another (Eph 1:15-23; 3:14-19; 6:18-20). No one should look down on others or on their gifts, since God has chosen each one to function in his or her place in the body (1 Cor 12:14-26). The gifts are given to equip “the saints, for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:12-13, <span>rsv<\/span>). The goal is “to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (vv 15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Body; Church; Lord’s Supper, The; Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","summary_en":"BODY OF CHRIST Scriptural phrase referring to (1) the physical body of Jesus Christ, (2) his broken body and shed blood viewed symbolically and memorially in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, and (3) both the local and universal church viewed metaphorically. The Physical Body of Jesus Christ The NT declares that the Son (the second person of the Trinity) had a human body prepared for him by God the Father (Heb 10:5). The earthly body was engendered by the conceptive work of the Holy Sp...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7921,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant, the New","title_en":"Covenant, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>A second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ANewCovenant\">A New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Even though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SuperiorityoftheNewCovenant\">Superiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n<p>1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\n<p>A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>A second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ANewCovenant\">A New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\n<p>Even though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\n<p>In his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (<span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SuperiorityoftheNewCovenant\">Superiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n<p>1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","summary_en":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12740,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Forgiveness","title_en":"Forgiveness","content_ro":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","summary_en":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17630,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Intercession","title_en":"of Christ*, Intercession","content_ro":"<h3>INTERCESSION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “meet,” “approach,” or “make an appeal.” In intertestamental literature that word was employed in the sense of personally petitioning an official to gain a favor (e.g., 2 Macc 4:8). The noun form of the word is translated in the NT both as “intercession” (1 Tm 2:1) and as “prayer” (4:5).<\/p>\n<p>Theologians generally see intercession as the second phase of Christ’s “high priestly work,” after he first made satisfaction for sin through his suffering and death on the cross (1 Tm 2:5-6). In the OT one of the priest’s functions was to petition God on the people’s behalf. In particular, on the annual Day of Atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sin offering into the Holy of Holies, sanctified the sacred place by means of incense, and sprinkled the sacrificial blood on and about the “mercy seat” (Lv 16:11-19). Correspondingly, after Christ offered himself on the cross as the sacrifice for sins, he ascended to the Father and entered the heavenly sanctuary where he now represents his people (Heb 7:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessiononEarth\">Christ’s Intercession on Earth<\/p>\n<p>Before his life of intercession in heaven, Jesus Christ exercised such a ministry on earth, consistent with his own teaching that the disciples should always pray and not get discouraged (Lk 18:1). Scripture often points to Jesus in prayer. For example, Jesus interceded at the grave of his friend Lazarus (Jn 11:41-42). Jesus prayed all night on a mountain before selecting the 12 apostles (Lk 6:12-13). After warning his disciple Peter that Satan had designs on him, Jesus said to Peter, “I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ first words on the cross were a prayer for those who had persecuted him (23:34).<\/p>\n<p>The “high priestly prayer” recorded in John 17 provides the most complete account in Scripture of an intercessory prayer by Jesus. The ground, or basis, of his impassioned petition was his intimate relationship with his heavenly Father (Jn 17:5, 8). The objects of his prayer were (1) himself, that he might glorify the Father and complete the work he had been sent to accomplish (Jn 17:1-5); (2) his disciples, who were chosen to spread the gospel after his departure (vv 8-9); and (3) the entire family of believers (v 20). The goals of his intercession included (1) the unity of God’s people (vv 11, 21), (2) their joy in spite of hardships and discouragement (v 13), (3) their preservation from evil (v 15), (4) their sanctification by the Word of God (v 17), and (5) their eternal fellowship with Christ (v 24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessioninHeaven\">Christ’s Intercession in Heaven<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s intercession for his people, begun on earth, is continued in heaven. The Epistle to the Hebrews depicts Christ as a priest, placing considerable emphasis on his continuing ministry of intercession. Christ’s heavenly intercession is a sequel to his earthly sacrifice accomplished “once for all” (Heb 10:10-18). Jesus himself said, “Every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 10:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). His continuing intercession is recognized in such NT phrases as “through Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:8; 16:27; 1 Pt 2:5), “through him” (Col 3:17; Heb 13:15), and “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph 5:20).<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Christ’s heavenly intercession is explicitly affirmed in four NT texts. The apostle Paul spoke of Christ “at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The writer of Hebrews affirmed that Christ “is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb 7:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Further, Christ has entered “into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (9:24). The apostle John also described that ministry: “If any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn 2:1). The Greek word for “advocate” meant a legal counselor who appeared before a magistrate to plead a client’s cause. John thus pictured the ascended Lord as appearing before God on behalf of his people, presenting his own obedience and suffering as the ground for the believer’s acquittal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWayIntercessionWorks\">The Way Intercession Works<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s heavenly intercession has both a static aspect (his redemptive work has been completed) and a dynamic aspect (he continues to care for God’s people). Thus Christ’s intercession is seen as including (1) his presence with the Father as the ground of each believer’s justification (Heb 9:24); (2) his thwarting of Satan’s accusations against each believer (Rom 8:33; Rv 12:10); (3) his claim for each believer’s right of access to the divine presence (Heb 4:14-16); and (4) his mediation of the prayers of each believer. The heavenly Father’s response is to impart the full range of spiritual blessings on believers. In the words of the Puritan John Owen (1616–83), “The intercession of Christ . . . is his continual appearance for us in the presence of God, representing the efficacy of his oblation, accompanied with tender care, love and desires for the welfare, supply, deliverance and salvation of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>Those for whom Christ intercedes in heaven are described in Scripture both broadly and narrowly. Christ is said to pray for all people everywhere (Is 53:12; cf. Mt 26:28). More specifically, and perhaps more profoundly, he prays for his own redeemed community, the church (Jn 14:16; 17:9, 20; Heb 4:15-16). Nevertheless, Christ’s prayers are also centered on the specific needs of individual believers (Lk 22:31-32; 1 Jn 2:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INTERCESSION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “meet,” “approach,” or “make an appeal.” In intertestamental literature that word was employed in the sense of personally petitioning an official to gain a favor (e.g., 2 Macc 4:8). The noun form of the word is translated in the NT both as “intercession” (1 Tm 2:1) and as “prayer” (4:5).<\/p>\n<p>Theologians generally see intercession as the second phase of Christ’s “high priestly work,” after he first made satisfaction for sin through his suffering and death on the cross (1 Tm 2:5-6). In the OT one of the priest’s functions was to petition God on the people’s behalf. In particular, on the annual Day of Atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sin offering into the Holy of Holies, sanctified the sacred place by means of incense, and sprinkled the sacrificial blood on and about the “mercy seat” (Lv 16:11-19). Correspondingly, after Christ offered himself on the cross as the sacrifice for sins, he ascended to the Father and entered the heavenly sanctuary where he now represents his people (Heb 7:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessiononEarth\">Christ’s Intercession on Earth<\/p>\n<p>Before his life of intercession in heaven, Jesus Christ exercised such a ministry on earth, consistent with his own teaching that the disciples should always pray and not get discouraged (Lk 18:1). Scripture often points to Jesus in prayer. For example, Jesus interceded at the grave of his friend Lazarus (Jn 11:41-42). Jesus prayed all night on a mountain before selecting the 12 apostles (Lk 6:12-13). After warning his disciple Peter that Satan had designs on him, Jesus said to Peter, “I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ first words on the cross were a prayer for those who had persecuted him (23:34).<\/p>\n<p>The “high priestly prayer” recorded in John 17 provides the most complete account in Scripture of an intercessory prayer by Jesus. The ground, or basis, of his impassioned petition was his intimate relationship with his heavenly Father (Jn 17:5, 8). The objects of his prayer were (1) himself, that he might glorify the Father and complete the work he had been sent to accomplish (Jn 17:1-5); (2) his disciples, who were chosen to spread the gospel after his departure (vv 8-9); and (3) the entire family of believers (v 20). The goals of his intercession included (1) the unity of God’s people (vv 11, 21), (2) their joy in spite of hardships and discouragement (v 13), (3) their preservation from evil (v 15), (4) their sanctification by the Word of God (v 17), and (5) their eternal fellowship with Christ (v 24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsIntercessioninHeaven\">Christ’s Intercession in Heaven<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s intercession for his people, begun on earth, is continued in heaven. The Epistle to the Hebrews depicts Christ as a priest, placing considerable emphasis on his continuing ministry of intercession. Christ’s heavenly intercession is a sequel to his earthly sacrifice accomplished “once for all” (Heb 10:10-18). Jesus himself said, “Every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 10:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). His continuing intercession is recognized in such NT phrases as “through Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:8; 16:27; 1 Pt 2:5), “through him” (Col 3:17; Heb 13:15), and “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Eph 5:20).<\/p>\n<p>The doctrine of Christ’s heavenly intercession is explicitly affirmed in four NT texts. The apostle Paul spoke of Christ “at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The writer of Hebrews affirmed that Christ “is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb 7:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Further, Christ has entered “into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (9:24). The apostle John also described that ministry: “If any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn 2:1). The Greek word for “advocate” meant a legal counselor who appeared before a magistrate to plead a client’s cause. John thus pictured the ascended Lord as appearing before God on behalf of his people, presenting his own obedience and suffering as the ground for the believer’s acquittal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWayIntercessionWorks\">The Way Intercession Works<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s heavenly intercession has both a static aspect (his redemptive work has been completed) and a dynamic aspect (he continues to care for God’s people). Thus Christ’s intercession is seen as including (1) his presence with the Father as the ground of each believer’s justification (Heb 9:24); (2) his thwarting of Satan’s accusations against each believer (Rom 8:33; Rv 12:10); (3) his claim for each believer’s right of access to the divine presence (Heb 4:14-16); and (4) his mediation of the prayers of each believer. The heavenly Father’s response is to impart the full range of spiritual blessings on believers. In the words of the Puritan John Owen (1616–83), “The intercession of Christ . . . is his continual appearance for us in the presence of God, representing the efficacy of his oblation, accompanied with tender care, love and desires for the welfare, supply, deliverance and salvation of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>Those for whom Christ intercedes in heaven are described in Scripture both broadly and narrowly. Christ is said to pray for all people everywhere (Is 53:12; cf. Mt 26:28). More specifically, and perhaps more profoundly, he prays for his own redeemed community, the church (Jn 14:16; 17:9, 20; Heb 4:15-16). Nevertheless, Christ’s prayers are also centered on the specific needs of individual believers (Lk 22:31-32; 1 Jn 2:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"INTERCESSION OF CHRIST* Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth. The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, rsv). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “mee...","summary_en":"INTERCESSION OF CHRIST* Theological term for Christ’s activity of petitioning God the Father to save, help, and sustain people on earth. The Hebrew word meaning “to make intercession” is from a root meaning “to strike”; hence it means “to assail or encounter with a request.” That word is used prophetically of the ministry of the “servant of the Lord”: “He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Is 53:12, rsv). The principal Greek verb meant in secular usage to “mee...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23501,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24944,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mediator Mediate","title_en":"Mediator Mediate","content_ro":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","summary_en":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26420,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","summary_en":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32663,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Sins*, Remission","title_en":"of Sins*, Remission","content_ro":"<h3>REMISSION OF SINS*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV phrase synonymous with “forgiveness of sins.” The NT uses a variety of terms to describe a single truth. With the concept of forgiveness of sins, there are a number of expressions employed (“passing over,” Rom 3:25; “covered,” Rom 4:7; “not imputed,” Rom 4:8; “remembered no more,” Heb 10:17). One of the most significant is the word rendered “remission” (Mt 26:28; Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 3:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 10:43; Heb 9:22; 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The word has an interesting tradition in the Greek language. In the legal sense, it was used to denote dismissal from office, release from obligation, remittance of debt or punishment. In time it also referred to amnesty or exemption from taxation. In NT usage the verb means “to let go,” “to leave behind,” or “to send away.” Hence, the noun can be (and frequently is) translated “forgiveness” as well as “remission” (Acts 5:31; 13:38; 26:18; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14). While forgiveness can be exercised at both the human and divine levels, the forgiveness indicated by the word “remission” is almost always that of God (Mt 26:28; Acts 10:43).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Forgiveness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REMISSION OF SINS*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV phrase synonymous with “forgiveness of sins.” The NT uses a variety of terms to describe a single truth. With the concept of forgiveness of sins, there are a number of expressions employed (“passing over,” Rom 3:25; “covered,” Rom 4:7; “not imputed,” Rom 4:8; “remembered no more,” Heb 10:17). One of the most significant is the word rendered “remission” (Mt 26:28; Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 3:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 10:43; Heb 9:22; 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The word has an interesting tradition in the Greek language. In the legal sense, it was used to denote dismissal from office, release from obligation, remittance of debt or punishment. In time it also referred to amnesty or exemption from taxation. In NT usage the verb means “to let go,” “to leave behind,” or “to send away.” Hence, the noun can be (and frequently is) translated “forgiveness” as well as “remission” (Acts 5:31; 13:38; 26:18; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14). While forgiveness can be exercised at both the human and divine levels, the forgiveness indicated by the word “remission” is almost always that of God (Mt 26:28; Acts 10:43).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Forgiveness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REMISSION OF SINS* KJV phrase synonymous with “forgiveness of sins.” The NT uses a variety of terms to describe a single truth. With the concept of forgiveness of sins, there are a number of expressions employed (“passing over,” Rom 3:25; “covered,” Rom 4:7; “not imputed,” Rom 4:8; “remembered no more,” Heb 10:17). One of the most significant is the word rendered “remission” (Mt 26:28; Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 3:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 10:43; Heb 9:22; 10:18). The word has an interesting tradition in th...","summary_en":"REMISSION OF SINS* KJV phrase synonymous with “forgiveness of sins.” The NT uses a variety of terms to describe a single truth. With the concept of forgiveness of sins, there are a number of expressions employed (“passing over,” Rom 3:25; “covered,” Rom 4:7; “not imputed,” Rom 4:8; “remembered no more,” Heb 10:17). One of the most significant is the word rendered “remission” (Mt 26:28; Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 3:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 10:43; Heb 9:22; 10:18). The word has an interesting tradition in th...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55051,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","summary_en":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82677,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","summary_en":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110303,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","summary_en":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137929,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:28<\/strong> <em>the covenant:<\/em> Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the <em>covenant<\/em> is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • <em>to forgive the sins of many:<\/em> Jesus shed his <em>blood<\/em> as a sacrifice for sin (see Jer 31:31-34; Mark 14:24). Some have understood <em>many<\/em> to refer only to God’s chosen people, while others have understood <em>many<\/em> to be an expression meaning “all” (cp. Matt 20:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","summary_en":"26:28 the covenant: Under God’s covenant with Israel, the blood of sheep or goats (Exod 12:5, 13; 24:8) was shed and placed on the two doorposts and on the lintel at Passover (Exod 12:7). The blood of Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, establishes a new covenant (see Jer 31:31). The idea of the covenant is God’s unilateral commitment to establish salvation for mankind, fulfilling the promise to Abraham (see Gen 12; Gal 3:15-29; 4:12-31). • to forgive the sins of many: Jesus shed his blood as a s...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60330,"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":64288,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87956,"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":91914,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115582,"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":119540,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143208,"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":147166,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":21789,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23513,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24837,"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":55052,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","summary_en":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82678,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","summary_en":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110304,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","summary_en":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137930,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:29<\/strong> <em>until the day:<\/em> Though the <em>Kingdom<\/em> had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • <em>until the day I drink it new:<\/em> The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","summary_en":"26:29 until the day: Though the Kingdom had been inaugurated in Jesus’ ministry, it awaits final consummation (see 1 Cor 15:20-28; Rev 19–22). • until the day I drink it new: The final consummation of the Kingdom is pictured as a feast like the Passover, symbolizing an eternal fellowship of love and peace.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65008,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92634,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120260,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147886,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":15093,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hallel*","title_en":"Hallel*","content_ro":"<h3>HALLEL*<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew term describing a song of praise to God. It was later used in the Talmud and in rabbinical writings to refer to several groups of psalms of praise to God. Psalms 113–118 were known as the Egyptian Hallel, and first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish tradition assigned them to Moses. During the temple period, this Hallel was recited on 18 days in the year, but only once at night, on the Passover. For that occasion it was recited in parts. Psalms 113–114 preceded the meal, prior to drinking the second cup, and Psalms 115–118 were recited after the last cup was filled. This is probably the song that is meant in the reference to the Last Supper of Jesus and his disciples, when they sang a “hymn” (Mt 26:30; Mk 14:26). This Hallel was also used for the feasts of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Tabernacles, and Dedication.<\/p>\n<p>The Great Hallel consisted of Psalm 136 but sometimes included Psalms 120–136. Psalms 146–148 were also considered a single Hallel. These were used in the daily morning service of the synagogue.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hallelujah; Talmud.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HALLEL*<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew term describing a song of praise to God. It was later used in the Talmud and in rabbinical writings to refer to several groups of psalms of praise to God. Psalms 113–118 were known as the Egyptian Hallel, and first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish tradition assigned them to Moses. During the temple period, this Hallel was recited on 18 days in the year, but only once at night, on the Passover. For that occasion it was recited in parts. Psalms 113–114 preceded the meal, prior to drinking the second cup, and Psalms 115–118 were recited after the last cup was filled. This is probably the song that is meant in the reference to the Last Supper of Jesus and his disciples, when they sang a “hymn” (Mt 26:30; Mk 14:26). This Hallel was also used for the feasts of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Tabernacles, and Dedication.<\/p>\n<p>The Great Hallel consisted of Psalm 136 but sometimes included Psalms 120–136. Psalms 146–148 were also considered a single Hallel. These were used in the daily morning service of the synagogue.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hallelujah; Talmud.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HALLEL* Hebrew term describing a song of praise to God. It was later used in the Talmud and in rabbinical writings to refer to several groups of psalms of praise to God. Psalms 113–118 were known as the Egyptian Hallel, and first-century AD Jewish tradition assigned them to Moses. During the temple period, this Hallel was recited on 18 days in the year, but only once at night, on the Passover. For that occasion it was recited in parts. Psalms 113–114 preceded the meal, prior to drinking the s...","summary_en":"HALLEL* Hebrew term describing a song of praise to God. It was later used in the Talmud and in rabbinical writings to refer to several groups of psalms of praise to God. Psalms 113–118 were known as the Egyptian Hallel, and first-century AD Jewish tradition assigned them to Moses. During the temple period, this Hallel was recited on 18 days in the year, but only once at night, on the Passover. For that occasion it was recited in parts. Psalms 113–114 preceded the meal, prior to drinking the s...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15105,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hallelujah","title_en":"Hallelujah","content_ro":"<h3>HALLELUJAH<\/h3>\n<p>Important Christian acclamation used extensively in the church’s worship and liturgy from early times. “Hallelujah” is a transliteration into Greek, and thence into English, of two Hebrew words that mean “Praise the Lord.” This combination of the two Hebrew words forms the characteristic call to praise. Jews living in the Dispersion in pre-Christian times were already using the transliteration in their synagogue worship. “Hallelujah,” according to ancient Hebrew tradition, is to be written as one word, except in Psalm 135:3. It occurs nowhere in the OT but in the Psalter, where it occurs 23 times, and for the first time in Psalm 104:35. Each of Psalms 111 to 113 begins with “Hallelujah”; each of Psalms 115 to 117 ends with the word; and each of Psalms 146 to 150 begins and ends with it.<\/p>\n<p>In the Septuagint version of Psalms 113–118, all the individual psalms are headed “Allelujah.” Through the Vulgate, this form of the word “Hallelujah” has come into use in the church. Like another famous Hebrew liturgical term, “Amen,” “Hallelujah” has passed from the OT to the NT, and thence to the Christian church. But in the <span>kjv<\/span> and <span>erv<\/span> the phrase is rendered “Praise ye the <span>Lord<\/span>,” and similarly, in the <span>rsv<\/span> and <span>nlt<\/span>, it is rendered “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew liturgical usage the Hallel, or Hymn of Praise, Psalms 113–118, is sung at the three great religious festivals of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. At the domestic celebration of Passover, Psalms 113 and 114 are sung before the meal and Psalms 115–118 are sung after it. Matthew 26:30 and Mark 14:26 refer to the singing of 115–118 as the “hymn” sung by the Lord and his disciples after their celebration of the Passover and before they left the upper room.<\/p>\n\n<p>“Hallelujah” does not appear anywhere in the NT except in Revelation 19:1-6. There it is a chant of the saints in heaven. It was taken over into the liturgy and hymnody of the church at an early date. It became the characteristic expression of joy and was therefore sung especially at Eastertide, as is witnessed by Augustine. The choice by the Christian church of Psalms 113, 114, and 118 from the Hebrew Hallel as the psalms to be sung on Easter day marks the liturgical connection of Easter with Passover.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hallel.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HALLELUJAH<\/h3>\n<p>Important Christian acclamation used extensively in the church’s worship and liturgy from early times. “Hallelujah” is a transliteration into Greek, and thence into English, of two Hebrew words that mean “Praise the Lord.” This combination of the two Hebrew words forms the characteristic call to praise. Jews living in the Dispersion in pre-Christian times were already using the transliteration in their synagogue worship. “Hallelujah,” according to ancient Hebrew tradition, is to be written as one word, except in Psalm 135:3. It occurs nowhere in the OT but in the Psalter, where it occurs 23 times, and for the first time in Psalm 104:35. Each of Psalms 111 to 113 begins with “Hallelujah”; each of Psalms 115 to 117 ends with the word; and each of Psalms 146 to 150 begins and ends with it.<\/p>\n<p>In the Septuagint version of Psalms 113–118, all the individual psalms are headed “Allelujah.” Through the Vulgate, this form of the word “Hallelujah” has come into use in the church. Like another famous Hebrew liturgical term, “Amen,” “Hallelujah” has passed from the OT to the NT, and thence to the Christian church. But in the <span>kjv<\/span> and <span>erv<\/span> the phrase is rendered “Praise ye the <span>Lord<\/span>,” and similarly, in the <span>rsv<\/span> and <span>nlt<\/span>, it is rendered “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew liturgical usage the Hallel, or Hymn of Praise, Psalms 113–118, is sung at the three great religious festivals of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. At the domestic celebration of Passover, Psalms 113 and 114 are sung before the meal and Psalms 115–118 are sung after it. Matthew 26:30 and Mark 14:26 refer to the singing of 115–118 as the “hymn” sung by the Lord and his disciples after their celebration of the Passover and before they left the upper room.<\/p>\n\n<p>“Hallelujah” does not appear anywhere in the NT except in Revelation 19:1-6. There it is a chant of the saints in heaven. It was taken over into the liturgy and hymnody of the church at an early date. It became the characteristic expression of joy and was therefore sung especially at Eastertide, as is witnessed by Augustine. The choice by the Christian church of Psalms 113, 114, and 118 from the Hebrew Hallel as the psalms to be sung on Easter day marks the liturgical connection of Easter with Passover.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hallel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HALLELUJAH Important Christian acclamation used extensively in the church’s worship and liturgy from early times. “Hallelujah” is a transliteration into Greek, and thence into English, of two Hebrew words that mean “Praise the Lord.” This combination of the two Hebrew words forms the characteristic call to praise. Jews living in the Dispersion in pre-Christian times were already using the transliteration in their synagogue worship. “Hallelujah,” according to ancient Hebrew tradition, is to be...","summary_en":"HALLELUJAH Important Christian acclamation used extensively in the church’s worship and liturgy from early times. “Hallelujah” is a transliteration into Greek, and thence into English, of two Hebrew words that mean “Praise the Lord.” This combination of the two Hebrew words forms the characteristic call to praise. Jews living in the Dispersion in pre-Christian times were already using the transliteration in their synagogue worship. “Hallelujah,” according to ancient Hebrew tradition, is to be...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26643,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Music","title_en":"Music","content_ro":"<h3>MUSIC<\/h3>\n<p>A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human impulse to sing. The injunction “sing to the Lord” was a signal for the people to pour out their praise in song.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible, however, is limited in its treatment of music in ancient Israel. Since there was no written musical notation, the primary record of songs sung by the Hebrews is the collection of texts, particularly the psalms, and a few enigmatic musical instructions. The biblical writers were writing a history not of their culture but of their relationship with God; hence, their comments about music are not critical. Also, the biblical documents cover a long span of history and are grouped according to category rather than in chronological order, thus making it difficult to order the development of musical style with precision. Finally, there is the problem of understanding the biblical descriptions of music and its performance. Only in this century have scholars been able to interpret the information provided in the Bible in terms of Eastern music systems.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheOldTestament\">Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The first musician mentioned in the Bible is “Jubal, the first musician—the inventor of the harp and flute” (Gn 4:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). The importance of this description of a musician so early in history lies in the equality Jubal is given with his brothers Jabal, the herdsman, and Tubal-cain, the smith. Music making is recognized among the earliest professions of nomadic peoples. The name Jubal is believed to be a derivative from the Hebrew word for “ram.” The ram’s horn <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shophar<\/span><em>)<\/em> was an early instrument of the Jewish people and was significant in signaling important events.<\/p>\n<p>For the most part, the music described in early biblical history was of a functional nature. Music gained special significance as it became an important part of temple worship. Many of the descriptions of music making in ancient Israel, before David’s time, are quite utilitarian. There are accounts of music at times of farewell (Gn 31:27), at times of rejoicing and feasting (Ex 32:17-18; Is 5:12; 24:8-9), at military victories (2 Chr 20:27-28), and for work (Nm 21:17, the song of the well diggers; Is 16:10; Jer 48:33). Most of this music was probably rather crude and primitive in nature, especially the music associated with military advances, which was meant to terrify the enemy (Jgs 7:17-20). The music and dancing that greeted Moses as he descended from the mountain was described as if it sounded like “war in the camp” (Ex 32:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>In the early history of the Jewish people, women played an important part in the performance of music. The image of women dancing and singing for joy accompanied by percussion instruments is repeated several times: Miriam led the women in a hymn of thanksgiving after the deliverance from the Red Sea (Ex 15); Jephthah’s daughter welcomed her father in his victory (Jgs 11:34); Deborah joined with Barak in singing a song of victory (Jgs 5); and women hailed David after his defeat of the Philistines (1 Sm 18:6-7). There is little mention of women as musicians following the establishment of the temple in Jerusalem, but there are a few allusions to the fact that women did participate in singing and dancing. The account of the return from exile in Babylon includes both male and female singers (Neh 7:67), confirming that women still took part in musical performance.<\/p>\n<p>As Jerusalem became the religious center of the Hebrew people (950–850 <span>BC<\/span>), the role of the professional musician became more important. The women’s songs became insignificant compared to the pomp and ceremony associated with the temple and the royal court. While the Levitical singers took most of the musical responsibility at the temple, the development of antiphonal singing allowed the people to join in on responses in the singing of psalms.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Style and Use<\/h5>\n<p>The Jewish people seem to have been especially musical. Of course, they were influenced by other ancient cultures, but there is evidence that they were in demand as musicians by other peoples. According to an Assyrian document, King Hezekiah gave as tribute to King Sennacherib many male and female Jewish musicians. The Babylonians demanded that the captive Jews sing to them and entertain them (cf. Ps 137:3).<\/p>\n<p>Since the OT’s purpose was to narrate the relationship between the Jewish nation and God, most of the references to music deal with its function in worship. However, evidence reveals that there was also a large body of secular musical literature. There may have been guilds of poets and singers early in Jewish history. The kinds of songs recorded in the early part of the OT represent a folklike poetry. The song of thanksgiving to the Lord by Moses and the people of Israel after their escape at the Red Sea is a stirring national song. Many descriptions of the biblical writers reflect the spirit of bardic song. This would be logical, as these stories were meant to be passed on. Marching songs (2 Chr 20:27-28), and songs of triumph (Jgs 5) also indicate a secular body of music.<\/p>\n<h5>Music in Worship<\/h5>\n<p>The singers and musicians for the temple worship were chosen from the tribe of Levi. King David assembled the Levites for a census, and out of the total of 38,000 men over the age of 30, 4,000 were chosen as musicians. These 4,000 were subsequently given specific jobs. “David and the chiefs of the service also set apart for the service certain of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with lyres, with harps, and with cymbals. . . . The number of them along with their brethren, who were trained in singing to the <span>Lord<\/span>, all who were skilful, was two hundred and eighty-eight” (1 Chr 25:1, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). The singers were further divided into 24 groups of 12 singers, who rotated in participating in the weekday, Sabbath, and high holy day services.<\/p>\n<p>According to a later source, there were minimum and maximum numbers of singers and instrumentalists required at each service. The minimum number of singers was twelve, the maximum was unlimited. There had to be in attendance at least two harps but no more than six, at least two flutes but no more than twelve, a minimum of two trumpets with no maximum, and a minimum of nine lyres with no maximum. There was only one player with a pair of cymbals.<\/p>\n<p>A singer was admitted to the Levitical choir at the age of thirty following a five-year apprenticeship (1 Chr 23:3). Five years is a relatively short time considering the amount of material these singers had to memorize (for there was no notation) and the liturgical ritual they had to master; it is speculated that they actually were in training from childhood. The Levites lived in villages outside the city wall and may have been actively involved in the musical education of their children (Neh 12:29). The Levites performed other duties connected with the sacred service, but the singers were excused from all other duties because they were on duty day and night (1 Chr 9:33). Their skills were an important part of the temple worship, and they were able to devote their entire life to the development of their musical ability. A singer served in the choir for 20 years, from age 30 to 50, and the music was of a high quality due to strict discipline and continuous practice and performance.<\/p>\n<p>From the beginning of Jewish formal worship connected with the tabernacle, music and sound was important. In Exodus 28:34-35 the descriptions of Aaron’s robe include bells attached to the lower hem that sounded as he entered the Holy Place. The first liturgical music mentioned in the OT is found in 2 Samuel 6 in the descriptions of the transfer of the ark: David and the Israelites sang, played instruments, and danced to the glory of the Lord. This music bore little resemblance to the stately ceremony described later in Solomon’s temple. In 2 Chronicles 7:6, David is given recognition for inventing the musical instruments used in the temple. In the postexilic era Levitical singers are mentioned as the descendants of Asaph, the “singing master” appointed by David (Ezr 2:41; Neh 7:44; 11:22-23). From passages such as these, we have a definite indication that liturgical music and organization stemmed from David’s time.<\/p>\n<p>The ceremonies in the Jewish temple were organized around the sacrifice. Singing formed an integral part of the sacrificial service and was necessary to validate the sacrificial action. There were special musical settings for each sacrifice; thus the daily burnt, expiatory, and laudatory offerings and libations had individual liturgies. Particular psalms became associated with certain sacrifices as well as with certain days of the week. The psalm of the day was intoned as the high priest started to pour out the drink offering. The psalm was divided into three sections, each signaled by the blowing of the trumpets, on which signal the people would prostrate themselves. This is the only time the trumpets were used together with the other instruments in orchestral fashion on solemn occasions (2 Chr 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicinthePsalms\">Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>The collection of 150 lyric poems known as the book of Psalms contains the most information on music making in ancient Israel. The Psalter contains not only religious songs but also songs that have their roots in secular or popular songs, such as work songs, love songs, and wedding songs. The majority are songs of praise, thanksgiving, prayer, and repentance. There are also historic odes that relate great national events—for example, Psalm 30, “a song at the dedication of the temple,” and Psalm 137, which portrays the sufferings of the Jews in captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The psalms were an important part of all the services of the temple; the Psalter became the liturgical hymnal of the Israelites. Worship included an appointed psalm for each day of the week. On the first day of the week, Psalm 24 was sung in remembrance of the first day of creation, Psalm 48 was sung on the second day, Psalm 82 on the third, Psalm 94 on the fourth, Psalm 81 on the fifth, Psalm 93 on the sixth, and Psalm 92 on the Sabbath. After the sacrificial offerings, Psalm 105:1-5 was sung at the morning service and Psalm 96 at the evening service. The Hallel psalms (Pss 113–118, 120–136, 146–148) were sung during the offering of the paschal lamb at the Passover feast.<\/p>\n<p>While most of the liturgical music was performed by Levites, texts of the psalms suggest that there was also congregational participation. The forms of music found both in synagogal and ecclesiastical chant had their source in the forms of the poetic text of the psalms. The simplest is the plain psalmody sung by one person (e.g., Pss 3–5, 46). In responsorial psalmody the soloist is answered by the choir (e.g., Ps 67:1-2; the soloist sang verse 1 and the choir answered with verse 2). Antiphonal psalmody involves two groups singing alternately (e.g., Ps 103:20-22). The congregation would chant a refrain such as appears in Psalm 80: “Restore us, O God; let thy face shine, that we may be saved!” recurs throughout the psalm (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Even though the synagogue had no altar for sacrifice, psalm singing retained an important place. After the Romans destroyed the temple, the worship heritage of the Jews could have been lost if the customs, including musical customs, had not become an integral part of synagogue worship.<\/p>\n<p>The most enigmatic part of the psalms is the headings that are not part of the poetic text. The first question is whether these should even be considered as superscripts. Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and other ancient languages were written in such a way that the text ran together without any break between chapters or paragraphs. This means that the verses, and even the division of the psalms themselves, were partially determined by copyists, chiefly the Masoretes. There is some question as to which psalms the extrapoetic texts actually belong with; they may actually be subscripts instead of superscripts. Sumerian and Babylonian poetry had information such as the name of the author, the musical instrument used for accompaniment, the tune, the purpose, and such listed at the end of the poem. Hence, some of the headings may actually be endings.<\/p>\n<p>The indications at the beginning of a psalm fall into three categories. They are either musical terms giving direction for the actual performance, musical cues designating the tune to which the psalm would be sung, or comments indicating the function of the psalm. These terms have been interpreted in various ways.<\/p>\n<p>Originally, these headings may have been marginal notes for the choir leaders. Realizing that these terms were not related to the psalm text proper, early biblical scribes may not have been overly careful with their placement in the text, which may explain some of the discrepancies among the early manuscripts—why certain words are left out in some and why terms assigned to only a few psalms may originally have been indicated on more of them.<\/p>\n<p>All but 50 of the psalms contain a proper name in the heading. These names possibly indicate the author; other commentators, interpreting the preposition appearing before the names to mean “for,” think the names are a dedication. Thus the title would be “A Psalm for David,” not “A Psalm of David.” This may be the case with the names of Asaph, Heman, Ethan, and especially the sons of Korah, where it would make better sense for the psalm to be written for rather than by the family. Seventy-three psalms have David’s name in the heading, hence the common reference to the Psalter as the Psalms of David. Twelve include the name of Asaph, eleven the children of Korah, two Solomon, and one each contains Moses, Heman, and Ethan.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Terms in the Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Numerous musical terms are included in the superscriptions to cue the kind of instrumental accompaniment, mood, and style of performance for the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is one of the most controversial terms found in the psalm headings. It appears at the beginning of Psalm 46 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:20. One meaning for the Hebrew word is “maiden,” and musicologists interpret this as an instruction that the psalm should be sung in the range of the female singing voice. The reference in Chronicles is to harps in the range of women’s voices. This interpretation does not seem to fit Psalm 46, but if we look at the preceding psalm and read the term as a subscript, it becomes logical. Psalm 45 is a song of love, actually a nuptial ode; it would be natural for women to sing the second half (vv 10-17). While there is little mention of women singing in the temple, there is speculation that young boys in training may have sung along with the Levitical singers. Also this may be a case where the term appears only once in the modern text but may have been used more often in the original. Another possible meaning for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is “flutes,” perhaps describing the kind of musical accompaniment for the performance of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gittith<\/span> is a term found in the superscriptions of Psalms 8, 81, and 84. It may be a musical cue, indicating a mood for the performance of these psalms, but a more common explanation is that it is a collective term for the stringed instruments that would have accompanied them.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> has been left in its original Hebrew form by early translators and is found in the headings of Psalms 53 and 88. It may have roots in the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahaleh<\/span> “sickness” or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahot<\/span> “dance,” though neither of these words can be related to the psalm texts. Another explanation is a musical one. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> may come from the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span> meaning “to pierce,” implying that the psalm was to be accompanied with pipes.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Maskil<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Maschil”) appears in the headings of 13 psalms (Pss 32, 42, 44–45, 52–55, 74, 78, 88–89, 142). The term is probably derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sakal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to have insight or comprehension,” but there is no agreement among commentators. By looking at the psalms themselves, their didactic nature and the structure of stanzas and refrains, musicologists conclude the term represents a song of praise, possibly sung by a soloist with participation by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> appears in the heading of 55 psalms. It appears 52 times in the first three books of Psalms (Pss 1–89), not at all in book four (Pss 90–106), and 3 times in book five (Pss 107–150). The most common modern translations are “to the Choirmaster” (<span>rsv<\/span>), “to the choir director” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>), “to the director of music” (<span>niv<\/span>), “to the chief Musician” (<span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The word is derived from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nazzah<\/span><em>,<\/em> appearing in 1 Chronicles 23:4 and Ezra 3:8-9 in the sense of “administering.” In 1 Chronicles 15:21 the word is found in relation to leading or directing song in the temple. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> relates to the choirmaster and represents the singer chosen to lead the music who probably was involved in rehearsing and instructing. It is now assumed that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> indicates the psalm was to be sung partially or entirely by a soloist. This is evidenced by the change in some texts from “I” where the soloist sang, to “we” where the choir or congregation sang. Psalm 5 is an example of a text divided for solo and choral singing: verses 1-3 solo; verses 4-6 choral; verses 7-8 solo; verses 9-10 choral; and verses 11-12 end the psalm with the combined soloist and choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Miktam<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Michtam”) is another term that has no clear musical meaning, due mainly to the fact that its etymology is unknown. It occurs in Psalms 16 and 56–60, all of which have a character of lamentation or supplication. In a musical sense, it probably meant that a certain well-known tune was to be selected as the melody of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mizmor<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning a song sung to instrumental accompaniment) is found nowhere else in the Bible; it is included in the superscriptions of 57 psalms. It probably indicated a song accompanied by melodic instruments as opposed to a dance song accompanied by rhythmic instruments.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span> appears in the superscriptions of Psalms 4, 6, 54–55, 61, 67, and 76. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginah<\/span> and its plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginoth<\/span> are found in Psalm 77:7, Lamentations 5:14, Isaiah 38:20, and Habakkuk 3:19. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span><em>,<\/em> from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">naggen<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to touch the strings,” instructs that stringed instruments accompany the singing.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nehiloth<\/span> is found only in the introduction to Psalm 5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). The origin of the word is problematic. It could come from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nahal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to possess or inherit,” or more feasibly from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to pierce.” The latter implies the idea of a pierced instrument (the flute or pipe) to be used for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheminith<\/span> appears in Psalms 6 and 12 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:21. The Hebrew word means literally “over the eighth.” Some scholars feel it had something to do with an octave, but the Hebrew musical language probably did not include a musical unit divided into eight parts. Other scholars interpret <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> as meaning an eight-stringed instrument. A more logical interpretation comes from examining its use in 1 Chronicles. In 15:20 the instructions are for musicians to play the harps according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and in verse 21 to play the lyres according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span><em>.<\/em> Here the terms <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> seem to be used in opposition. If <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> implies a register of the female voice, then <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> would imply a lower register. Thus, it may have been an instruction to use a lower pitched instrument for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<h5>Psalm Varieties in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Some of the notes in the psalm headings are indications of the type or variety of psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hazkir<\/span> is found in the headings of Psalms 38 and 70. According to the Targum, this is an indication that the psalm was sung at the sacrificial rite called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">askara<\/span> and is translated “for a memorial offering.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Lammed<\/span> appears in the superscription of Psalm 60 in the phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">le-lammed<\/span><em>,<\/em> translated “to teach.” According to tradition, this was a psalm, though undoubtedly not the only one, taught to young people as part of their education. This is another example of a term that may have been omitted from other psalms in later versions of the Psalter.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shiggaion<\/span> is in the heading of Psalm 7 and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably comes from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to wander,” but may also be connected with the Assyrian liturgical term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigu<\/span><em>,<\/em> which represented a plaintive song in several stanzas. Biblical scholars have assumed <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shiggaion<\/span><em>,<\/em> plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigionoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> was a lament or penitential song.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir<\/span> is the simplest word for “song” and was probably used in the headings at an early stage of the Psalter; it is usually found with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mizmor<\/span> (13 times). Fifteen psalms have this heading. It was probably the term for a specific type of praise song, usually performed by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hamaalot<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Lamaalot<\/span> occur in the headings of Psalms 120–134, which are often referred to as the Psalms of Ascent (<span>kjv<\/span> “Psalms of Degrees”). Most explanations offered relate to the fact that the temple was situated on high ground. Often these 15 psalms are associated with the 15 steps leading from the Court of the Women to the Court of the Israelites. But most contemporary scholars believe the idea of “going up” referred to the pilgrims’ journey to Jerusalem to worship at the temple. These psalms are short, with popular appeal, making them appropriate for singing during the journey.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hanukkat Habayit<\/span> is found only in the heading of Psalm 30. This phrase tells that the psalm was to be used for the dedication or rededication of the house of God.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir-yedidot<\/span> appears only in Psalm 45. It refers to a love song that was probably sung at wedding ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Tefillah<\/span> is a common term for “prayer” and appears in the headings of Psalms 17, 86, 90, 102, and 142, and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably refers to a specific form of poetic prayer.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span> is one of the most frequently used, but most enigmatic, terms found in the book of Psalms. It occurs in 39 psalms, appearing a total of 71 times in the Psalter—67 times within the text and 4 times at the end of a psalm. It is most frequent in the first three books. In the first book <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> appears in 9 psalms; in the second book, 17 psalms; in the third book, 11 psalms. In the fourth book it is not found at all and in the fifth book in only two psalms. Thirty-one of these psalms also include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> in their superscriptions, which implies that they were sung by a soloist and choir. Most commonly, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is interpreted as a signal for a break in the singing and possibly for an instrumental interlude. It never appears at the beginning of a psalm but only in the middle of the text or at the end. The regularity of its appearance within a psalm is not consistent, and in only a few instances do these divisions break the psalm into equal sections. Because of the random placement of the term, some scholars believe that, like the headings, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> was not always carefully copied into the text. It may have been a note appearing only in the texts of the musicians, which would explain this inconsistency. An explanation of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is found in the Talmudic tradition: “Ben Azra clashed the cymbal and the Levites broke forth into singing. When they reached a break in the singing they blew upon the trumpets and the people prostrated themselves; at every break there was a blowing of the trumpet and at every blowing of the trumpet a prostration. This was the rite of the daily whole offering in the service of the House of our God.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, would be an instruction for the musicians that the singing was to cease and the instrumentalists were to play.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaion selah<\/span> appears once, in Psalm 9:16. The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaiaon<\/span> comes from the root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to murmur, to growl, to produce a low sound.” This may have been an instruction for the interlude to be more subdued than a normal <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Ancient Melodies in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Many psalms contain headings that are not direct musical references but are cue words to suggest well-known tunes. They probably refer either to names or the first words of popular secular songs <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span><em>)<\/em> whose melodic patterns were used in singing the psalm. Many biblical scholars have tried to find hidden meaning in these headings, but most musicologists believe these are simply references or introductions to melodies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Aijeleth Shahar<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 22 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Hind of the Dawn” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune of ‘The Doe of the Morning’ ” (<span>niv<\/span>), “To the tune ‘Doe of the Dawn’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Al-taschith<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 57–59 and 75 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Do Not Destroy!’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Jonath-elem-rechokim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 56 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Dove on Far-off Terebinths” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune ‘Dove on Distant Oaks’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath Leannoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 88, is translated “To the tune ‘The Suffering of Affliction’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Muthlabben<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 9, is translated “To the tune ‘Death of the Son’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 45 and 69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim-Eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 80 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies of the Covenant’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shushan-eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 60, is translated “To the tune ‘Lily of the Testimony’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>These melody types appear only in the first three books of the Psalter, and this may imply that these popular <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span> had fallen into disuse by the time the final books of the Psalter were written. Other <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makam<\/span>-types had probably become popular, and the authors, realizing the relatively short life of a popular tune, did not include them in the headings of the Psalms but left the choice up to the performer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheNewTestament\">Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>First-Century Influences<\/h5>\n<h6>The Synagogue<\/h6>\n<p>By the time of Christ, the synagogue had become the chief place of worship for the Jewish people. It began as a place for study of the law but gradually became the center of worship for Jews unable to attend the temple. The liturgical service of the temple could not be duplicated in the synagogue as there was no sacrificial rite, and the music could not be exactly reproduced as there were no trained Levitical singers. Scholars do not agree about the amount of continuity between the music of the temple and the music of the synagogue, but there is evidence that certain musical practices did remain constant between the two places of worship.<\/p>\n<p>Information on the customs and rituals of the synagogue come from Talmudic writings. The musical elements of worship in the synagogue were the chanting of Scripture, psalmody, and spiritual songs. The choral singing of the temple was replaced by a single cantor. The cantor was a layman who, according to tradition, had to have the following qualifications: “He had to be well educated, gifted with a sweet voice, of humble personality, recognized by the community, conversant with Scripture and all the prayers; he must not be a rich man, for his prayers should come from his heart.” His most important job was the cantillation of the Law and the Prophets. A series of accents and punctuations, forerunners of actual musical notation, were indications for the cantor in the musical interpretation of the Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm singing was gradually transplanted from the temple to the synagogue, which in turn influenced the early Christian church. Gregorian psalm tones have their roots in Hebrew psalmody.<\/p>\n<h6>Greek and Roman Cultures<\/h6>\n<p>While both the temple and the synagogue were familiar to the early Christians (Acts 2:46-47; 3:1; 5:42; 9:20; 18:4; etc.), the Greek and Roman cultures also played a major part in shaping the young church. Hellenistic influences by the time of Christ had long been felt in the Middle East, and while it was strongly opposed by some Jewish leaders, the Greek arts had permeated Jewish culture. Greek philosophers considered music a cathartic force that could lead humans into metaphysical knowledge. This understanding led to the belief that music had a moral substance that could influence people to either good or evil. If this philosophy had totally encompassed Judeo-Christian thought, certainly Paul would have encouraged the use of music in the spread of the gospel. However, Paul’s omission of this theory implies that the Judeo-Christian world at that time had rejected the Greek ideal, at least in part.<\/p>\n<p>While the Jewish rabbis considered music an art form for the praise of God, and while the Greek philosophers thought of it as a powerful moral force in creation, the Romans considered music mainly as entertainment. The music of the Roman games was neither religious nor philosophic and, from the accounts of witnesses, it was not technically exceptional. In the Roman Empire musicians were given a lower status and looked on as mere entertainers. One reason the early church did not include instrumental music in their worship was in reaction to the debased secular use of instruments by the Romans.<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament Writings<\/h5>\n<p>One of the few mentions of instruments in the NT is the use of flutes at a wake (Mt 9:23). As in the OT, music is associated with feasting and merrymaking (e.g., the return of the prodigal son, Lk 15:25). Five passages mention music metaphorically (Mt 6:2; 11:17; Lk 7:32; 1 Cor 13:1; 14:7-8). The most well known of these is Paul’s celebration of love in 1 Corinthians 13. The denunciation of the gong and cymbals must be understood in light of the attitude of the early Christians toward the music of the Pharisees. Here the signal instruments of the temple were used to represent pompous display of religious pietism.<\/p>\n\n<p>Most references to music are found in the eschatological visions and prophetic passages scattered throughout the NT—most frequently in the book of Revelation (also Mt 24:31; 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thes 4:16; Heb 12:19). Many of these descriptions have a direct association with musical references in the OT (e.g., the use of harps and trumpets and the singing of the Hallelujah). But the value of many of the passages in Revelation comes from their literary style. These doxological and psalmlike passages were probably spontaneous “spiritual songs” composed by the young church (e.g., Rv 5:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The passages that mention religious or liturgical music are often more conceptual than literal. Two parallel passages describing the Last Supper (Mt 26:30; Mk 14:26) mention that Christ and his disciples sang a hymn. This is the only direct account of Jesus singing, but it is probable that when he read in the synagogue he did so in the accepted vocal style (Lk 4:16-20). There is much controversy surrounding the actual events at the Last Supper, but we can assume that the hymn sung was a traditional Jewish hymn, probably associated with the Passover.<\/p>\n<p>From the account in Acts 16:25 we know that Paul and Silas sang hymns while in jail. Paul gives instruction for music making in 1 Corinthians 14:15, 26 in terms of a balance between rationalism and emotion. And, as with all the gifts of the Spirit, Paul asks that singing be done for edification.<\/p>\n<p>In two similar passages (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16) Paul groups together three musical terms—psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. The singing of psalms was an obvious carryover from the synagogue, and we can assume that the early Christian psalm singing followed the Jewish style. The term for “hymns” probably refers to poetic texts, possibly modeled after the psalms, but in praise of Christ. “Spiritual songs” may refer to a spontaneous, ecstatic form of musical prayer, possibly wordless (perhaps related to glossolalia), in a style that was popular in mystical Judaism. These outbursts of song were probably melismatic (sung on one tone) and are perhaps the forerunners of the later Alleluia chant.<\/p>\n<h5>Hymnody in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>It can be assumed that the early Christians composed hymns in praise of Christ. Logically, most of the hymns found in the NT are based on Hebrew poetic psalm forms, but there is Greek and Latin influence also. The hymns from the Gospel of Luke have become well-known canticles adopted by the church: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (1:68-79), the Gloria (2:14) and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). While patterned after the psalms of the OT, these hymns are full of confidence in the salvation of Christ and in his imminent return. Other Christological hymns found in the NT include the prologue to the Gospel of John, Ephesians 2:14-16, Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20, 1 Timothy 3:16, Hebrews 1:3, and 1 Peter 3:18-22.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MUSIC<\/h3>\n<p>A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human impulse to sing. The injunction “sing to the Lord” was a signal for the people to pour out their praise in song.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible, however, is limited in its treatment of music in ancient Israel. Since there was no written musical notation, the primary record of songs sung by the Hebrews is the collection of texts, particularly the psalms, and a few enigmatic musical instructions. The biblical writers were writing a history not of their culture but of their relationship with God; hence, their comments about music are not critical. Also, the biblical documents cover a long span of history and are grouped according to category rather than in chronological order, thus making it difficult to order the development of musical style with precision. Finally, there is the problem of understanding the biblical descriptions of music and its performance. Only in this century have scholars been able to interpret the information provided in the Bible in terms of Eastern music systems.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheOldTestament\">Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The first musician mentioned in the Bible is “Jubal, the first musician—the inventor of the harp and flute” (Gn 4:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). The importance of this description of a musician so early in history lies in the equality Jubal is given with his brothers Jabal, the herdsman, and Tubal-cain, the smith. Music making is recognized among the earliest professions of nomadic peoples. The name Jubal is believed to be a derivative from the Hebrew word for “ram.” The ram’s horn <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shophar<\/span><em>)<\/em> was an early instrument of the Jewish people and was significant in signaling important events.<\/p>\n<p>For the most part, the music described in early biblical history was of a functional nature. Music gained special significance as it became an important part of temple worship. Many of the descriptions of music making in ancient Israel, before David’s time, are quite utilitarian. There are accounts of music at times of farewell (Gn 31:27), at times of rejoicing and feasting (Ex 32:17-18; Is 5:12; 24:8-9), at military victories (2 Chr 20:27-28), and for work (Nm 21:17, the song of the well diggers; Is 16:10; Jer 48:33). Most of this music was probably rather crude and primitive in nature, especially the music associated with military advances, which was meant to terrify the enemy (Jgs 7:17-20). The music and dancing that greeted Moses as he descended from the mountain was described as if it sounded like “war in the camp” (Ex 32:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>In the early history of the Jewish people, women played an important part in the performance of music. The image of women dancing and singing for joy accompanied by percussion instruments is repeated several times: Miriam led the women in a hymn of thanksgiving after the deliverance from the Red Sea (Ex 15); Jephthah’s daughter welcomed her father in his victory (Jgs 11:34); Deborah joined with Barak in singing a song of victory (Jgs 5); and women hailed David after his defeat of the Philistines (1 Sm 18:6-7). There is little mention of women as musicians following the establishment of the temple in Jerusalem, but there are a few allusions to the fact that women did participate in singing and dancing. The account of the return from exile in Babylon includes both male and female singers (Neh 7:67), confirming that women still took part in musical performance.<\/p>\n<p>As Jerusalem became the religious center of the Hebrew people (950–850 <span>BC<\/span>), the role of the professional musician became more important. The women’s songs became insignificant compared to the pomp and ceremony associated with the temple and the royal court. While the Levitical singers took most of the musical responsibility at the temple, the development of antiphonal singing allowed the people to join in on responses in the singing of psalms.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Style and Use<\/h5>\n<p>The Jewish people seem to have been especially musical. Of course, they were influenced by other ancient cultures, but there is evidence that they were in demand as musicians by other peoples. According to an Assyrian document, King Hezekiah gave as tribute to King Sennacherib many male and female Jewish musicians. The Babylonians demanded that the captive Jews sing to them and entertain them (cf. Ps 137:3).<\/p>\n<p>Since the OT’s purpose was to narrate the relationship between the Jewish nation and God, most of the references to music deal with its function in worship. However, evidence reveals that there was also a large body of secular musical literature. There may have been guilds of poets and singers early in Jewish history. The kinds of songs recorded in the early part of the OT represent a folklike poetry. The song of thanksgiving to the Lord by Moses and the people of Israel after their escape at the Red Sea is a stirring national song. Many descriptions of the biblical writers reflect the spirit of bardic song. This would be logical, as these stories were meant to be passed on. Marching songs (2 Chr 20:27-28), and songs of triumph (Jgs 5) also indicate a secular body of music.<\/p>\n<h5>Music in Worship<\/h5>\n<p>The singers and musicians for the temple worship were chosen from the tribe of Levi. King David assembled the Levites for a census, and out of the total of 38,000 men over the age of 30, 4,000 were chosen as musicians. These 4,000 were subsequently given specific jobs. “David and the chiefs of the service also set apart for the service certain of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with lyres, with harps, and with cymbals. . . . The number of them along with their brethren, who were trained in singing to the <span>Lord<\/span>, all who were skilful, was two hundred and eighty-eight” (1 Chr 25:1, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). The singers were further divided into 24 groups of 12 singers, who rotated in participating in the weekday, Sabbath, and high holy day services.<\/p>\n<p>According to a later source, there were minimum and maximum numbers of singers and instrumentalists required at each service. The minimum number of singers was twelve, the maximum was unlimited. There had to be in attendance at least two harps but no more than six, at least two flutes but no more than twelve, a minimum of two trumpets with no maximum, and a minimum of nine lyres with no maximum. There was only one player with a pair of cymbals.<\/p>\n<p>A singer was admitted to the Levitical choir at the age of thirty following a five-year apprenticeship (1 Chr 23:3). Five years is a relatively short time considering the amount of material these singers had to memorize (for there was no notation) and the liturgical ritual they had to master; it is speculated that they actually were in training from childhood. The Levites lived in villages outside the city wall and may have been actively involved in the musical education of their children (Neh 12:29). The Levites performed other duties connected with the sacred service, but the singers were excused from all other duties because they were on duty day and night (1 Chr 9:33). Their skills were an important part of the temple worship, and they were able to devote their entire life to the development of their musical ability. A singer served in the choir for 20 years, from age 30 to 50, and the music was of a high quality due to strict discipline and continuous practice and performance.<\/p>\n<p>From the beginning of Jewish formal worship connected with the tabernacle, music and sound was important. In Exodus 28:34-35 the descriptions of Aaron’s robe include bells attached to the lower hem that sounded as he entered the Holy Place. The first liturgical music mentioned in the OT is found in 2 Samuel 6 in the descriptions of the transfer of the ark: David and the Israelites sang, played instruments, and danced to the glory of the Lord. This music bore little resemblance to the stately ceremony described later in Solomon’s temple. In 2 Chronicles 7:6, David is given recognition for inventing the musical instruments used in the temple. In the postexilic era Levitical singers are mentioned as the descendants of Asaph, the “singing master” appointed by David (Ezr 2:41; Neh 7:44; 11:22-23). From passages such as these, we have a definite indication that liturgical music and organization stemmed from David’s time.<\/p>\n<p>The ceremonies in the Jewish temple were organized around the sacrifice. Singing formed an integral part of the sacrificial service and was necessary to validate the sacrificial action. There were special musical settings for each sacrifice; thus the daily burnt, expiatory, and laudatory offerings and libations had individual liturgies. Particular psalms became associated with certain sacrifices as well as with certain days of the week. The psalm of the day was intoned as the high priest started to pour out the drink offering. The psalm was divided into three sections, each signaled by the blowing of the trumpets, on which signal the people would prostrate themselves. This is the only time the trumpets were used together with the other instruments in orchestral fashion on solemn occasions (2 Chr 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicinthePsalms\">Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>The collection of 150 lyric poems known as the book of Psalms contains the most information on music making in ancient Israel. The Psalter contains not only religious songs but also songs that have their roots in secular or popular songs, such as work songs, love songs, and wedding songs. The majority are songs of praise, thanksgiving, prayer, and repentance. There are also historic odes that relate great national events—for example, Psalm 30, “a song at the dedication of the temple,” and Psalm 137, which portrays the sufferings of the Jews in captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The psalms were an important part of all the services of the temple; the Psalter became the liturgical hymnal of the Israelites. Worship included an appointed psalm for each day of the week. On the first day of the week, Psalm 24 was sung in remembrance of the first day of creation, Psalm 48 was sung on the second day, Psalm 82 on the third, Psalm 94 on the fourth, Psalm 81 on the fifth, Psalm 93 on the sixth, and Psalm 92 on the Sabbath. After the sacrificial offerings, Psalm 105:1-5 was sung at the morning service and Psalm 96 at the evening service. The Hallel psalms (Pss 113–118, 120–136, 146–148) were sung during the offering of the paschal lamb at the Passover feast.<\/p>\n<p>While most of the liturgical music was performed by Levites, texts of the psalms suggest that there was also congregational participation. The forms of music found both in synagogal and ecclesiastical chant had their source in the forms of the poetic text of the psalms. The simplest is the plain psalmody sung by one person (e.g., Pss 3–5, 46). In responsorial psalmody the soloist is answered by the choir (e.g., Ps 67:1-2; the soloist sang verse 1 and the choir answered with verse 2). Antiphonal psalmody involves two groups singing alternately (e.g., Ps 103:20-22). The congregation would chant a refrain such as appears in Psalm 80: “Restore us, O God; let thy face shine, that we may be saved!” recurs throughout the psalm (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Even though the synagogue had no altar for sacrifice, psalm singing retained an important place. After the Romans destroyed the temple, the worship heritage of the Jews could have been lost if the customs, including musical customs, had not become an integral part of synagogue worship.<\/p>\n<p>The most enigmatic part of the psalms is the headings that are not part of the poetic text. The first question is whether these should even be considered as superscripts. Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and other ancient languages were written in such a way that the text ran together without any break between chapters or paragraphs. This means that the verses, and even the division of the psalms themselves, were partially determined by copyists, chiefly the Masoretes. There is some question as to which psalms the extrapoetic texts actually belong with; they may actually be subscripts instead of superscripts. Sumerian and Babylonian poetry had information such as the name of the author, the musical instrument used for accompaniment, the tune, the purpose, and such listed at the end of the poem. Hence, some of the headings may actually be endings.<\/p>\n<p>The indications at the beginning of a psalm fall into three categories. They are either musical terms giving direction for the actual performance, musical cues designating the tune to which the psalm would be sung, or comments indicating the function of the psalm. These terms have been interpreted in various ways.<\/p>\n<p>Originally, these headings may have been marginal notes for the choir leaders. Realizing that these terms were not related to the psalm text proper, early biblical scribes may not have been overly careful with their placement in the text, which may explain some of the discrepancies among the early manuscripts—why certain words are left out in some and why terms assigned to only a few psalms may originally have been indicated on more of them.<\/p>\n<p>All but 50 of the psalms contain a proper name in the heading. These names possibly indicate the author; other commentators, interpreting the preposition appearing before the names to mean “for,” think the names are a dedication. Thus the title would be “A Psalm for David,” not “A Psalm of David.” This may be the case with the names of Asaph, Heman, Ethan, and especially the sons of Korah, where it would make better sense for the psalm to be written for rather than by the family. Seventy-three psalms have David’s name in the heading, hence the common reference to the Psalter as the Psalms of David. Twelve include the name of Asaph, eleven the children of Korah, two Solomon, and one each contains Moses, Heman, and Ethan.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Terms in the Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Numerous musical terms are included in the superscriptions to cue the kind of instrumental accompaniment, mood, and style of performance for the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is one of the most controversial terms found in the psalm headings. It appears at the beginning of Psalm 46 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:20. One meaning for the Hebrew word is “maiden,” and musicologists interpret this as an instruction that the psalm should be sung in the range of the female singing voice. The reference in Chronicles is to harps in the range of women’s voices. This interpretation does not seem to fit Psalm 46, but if we look at the preceding psalm and read the term as a subscript, it becomes logical. Psalm 45 is a song of love, actually a nuptial ode; it would be natural for women to sing the second half (vv 10-17). While there is little mention of women singing in the temple, there is speculation that young boys in training may have sung along with the Levitical singers. Also this may be a case where the term appears only once in the modern text but may have been used more often in the original. Another possible meaning for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is “flutes,” perhaps describing the kind of musical accompaniment for the performance of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gittith<\/span> is a term found in the superscriptions of Psalms 8, 81, and 84. It may be a musical cue, indicating a mood for the performance of these psalms, but a more common explanation is that it is a collective term for the stringed instruments that would have accompanied them.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> has been left in its original Hebrew form by early translators and is found in the headings of Psalms 53 and 88. It may have roots in the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahaleh<\/span> “sickness” or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahot<\/span> “dance,” though neither of these words can be related to the psalm texts. Another explanation is a musical one. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> may come from the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span> meaning “to pierce,” implying that the psalm was to be accompanied with pipes.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Maskil<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Maschil”) appears in the headings of 13 psalms (Pss 32, 42, 44–45, 52–55, 74, 78, 88–89, 142). The term is probably derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sakal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to have insight or comprehension,” but there is no agreement among commentators. By looking at the psalms themselves, their didactic nature and the structure of stanzas and refrains, musicologists conclude the term represents a song of praise, possibly sung by a soloist with participation by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> appears in the heading of 55 psalms. It appears 52 times in the first three books of Psalms (Pss 1–89), not at all in book four (Pss 90–106), and 3 times in book five (Pss 107–150). The most common modern translations are “to the Choirmaster” (<span>rsv<\/span>), “to the choir director” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>), “to the director of music” (<span>niv<\/span>), “to the chief Musician” (<span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The word is derived from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nazzah<\/span><em>,<\/em> appearing in 1 Chronicles 23:4 and Ezra 3:8-9 in the sense of “administering.” In 1 Chronicles 15:21 the word is found in relation to leading or directing song in the temple. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> relates to the choirmaster and represents the singer chosen to lead the music who probably was involved in rehearsing and instructing. It is now assumed that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> indicates the psalm was to be sung partially or entirely by a soloist. This is evidenced by the change in some texts from “I” where the soloist sang, to “we” where the choir or congregation sang. Psalm 5 is an example of a text divided for solo and choral singing: verses 1-3 solo; verses 4-6 choral; verses 7-8 solo; verses 9-10 choral; and verses 11-12 end the psalm with the combined soloist and choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Miktam<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Michtam”) is another term that has no clear musical meaning, due mainly to the fact that its etymology is unknown. It occurs in Psalms 16 and 56–60, all of which have a character of lamentation or supplication. In a musical sense, it probably meant that a certain well-known tune was to be selected as the melody of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mizmor<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning a song sung to instrumental accompaniment) is found nowhere else in the Bible; it is included in the superscriptions of 57 psalms. It probably indicated a song accompanied by melodic instruments as opposed to a dance song accompanied by rhythmic instruments.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span> appears in the superscriptions of Psalms 4, 6, 54–55, 61, 67, and 76. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginah<\/span> and its plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginoth<\/span> are found in Psalm 77:7, Lamentations 5:14, Isaiah 38:20, and Habakkuk 3:19. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span><em>,<\/em> from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">naggen<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to touch the strings,” instructs that stringed instruments accompany the singing.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nehiloth<\/span> is found only in the introduction to Psalm 5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). The origin of the word is problematic. It could come from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nahal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to possess or inherit,” or more feasibly from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to pierce.” The latter implies the idea of a pierced instrument (the flute or pipe) to be used for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheminith<\/span> appears in Psalms 6 and 12 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:21. The Hebrew word means literally “over the eighth.” Some scholars feel it had something to do with an octave, but the Hebrew musical language probably did not include a musical unit divided into eight parts. Other scholars interpret <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> as meaning an eight-stringed instrument. A more logical interpretation comes from examining its use in 1 Chronicles. In 15:20 the instructions are for musicians to play the harps according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and in verse 21 to play the lyres according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span><em>.<\/em> Here the terms <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> seem to be used in opposition. If <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> implies a register of the female voice, then <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> would imply a lower register. Thus, it may have been an instruction to use a lower pitched instrument for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<h5>Psalm Varieties in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Some of the notes in the psalm headings are indications of the type or variety of psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hazkir<\/span> is found in the headings of Psalms 38 and 70. According to the Targum, this is an indication that the psalm was sung at the sacrificial rite called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">askara<\/span> and is translated “for a memorial offering.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Lammed<\/span> appears in the superscription of Psalm 60 in the phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">le-lammed<\/span><em>,<\/em> translated “to teach.” According to tradition, this was a psalm, though undoubtedly not the only one, taught to young people as part of their education. This is another example of a term that may have been omitted from other psalms in later versions of the Psalter.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shiggaion<\/span> is in the heading of Psalm 7 and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably comes from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to wander,” but may also be connected with the Assyrian liturgical term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigu<\/span><em>,<\/em> which represented a plaintive song in several stanzas. Biblical scholars have assumed <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shiggaion<\/span><em>,<\/em> plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigionoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> was a lament or penitential song.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir<\/span> is the simplest word for “song” and was probably used in the headings at an early stage of the Psalter; it is usually found with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mizmor<\/span> (13 times). Fifteen psalms have this heading. It was probably the term for a specific type of praise song, usually performed by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hamaalot<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Lamaalot<\/span> occur in the headings of Psalms 120–134, which are often referred to as the Psalms of Ascent (<span>kjv<\/span> “Psalms of Degrees”). Most explanations offered relate to the fact that the temple was situated on high ground. Often these 15 psalms are associated with the 15 steps leading from the Court of the Women to the Court of the Israelites. But most contemporary scholars believe the idea of “going up” referred to the pilgrims’ journey to Jerusalem to worship at the temple. These psalms are short, with popular appeal, making them appropriate for singing during the journey.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hanukkat Habayit<\/span> is found only in the heading of Psalm 30. This phrase tells that the psalm was to be used for the dedication or rededication of the house of God.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir-yedidot<\/span> appears only in Psalm 45. It refers to a love song that was probably sung at wedding ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Tefillah<\/span> is a common term for “prayer” and appears in the headings of Psalms 17, 86, 90, 102, and 142, and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably refers to a specific form of poetic prayer.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span> is one of the most frequently used, but most enigmatic, terms found in the book of Psalms. It occurs in 39 psalms, appearing a total of 71 times in the Psalter—67 times within the text and 4 times at the end of a psalm. It is most frequent in the first three books. In the first book <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> appears in 9 psalms; in the second book, 17 psalms; in the third book, 11 psalms. In the fourth book it is not found at all and in the fifth book in only two psalms. Thirty-one of these psalms also include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> in their superscriptions, which implies that they were sung by a soloist and choir. Most commonly, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is interpreted as a signal for a break in the singing and possibly for an instrumental interlude. It never appears at the beginning of a psalm but only in the middle of the text or at the end. The regularity of its appearance within a psalm is not consistent, and in only a few instances do these divisions break the psalm into equal sections. Because of the random placement of the term, some scholars believe that, like the headings, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> was not always carefully copied into the text. It may have been a note appearing only in the texts of the musicians, which would explain this inconsistency. An explanation of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is found in the Talmudic tradition: “Ben Azra clashed the cymbal and the Levites broke forth into singing. When they reached a break in the singing they blew upon the trumpets and the people prostrated themselves; at every break there was a blowing of the trumpet and at every blowing of the trumpet a prostration. This was the rite of the daily whole offering in the service of the House of our God.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, would be an instruction for the musicians that the singing was to cease and the instrumentalists were to play.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaion selah<\/span> appears once, in Psalm 9:16. The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaiaon<\/span> comes from the root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to murmur, to growl, to produce a low sound.” This may have been an instruction for the interlude to be more subdued than a normal <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Ancient Melodies in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Many psalms contain headings that are not direct musical references but are cue words to suggest well-known tunes. They probably refer either to names or the first words of popular secular songs <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span><em>)<\/em> whose melodic patterns were used in singing the psalm. Many biblical scholars have tried to find hidden meaning in these headings, but most musicologists believe these are simply references or introductions to melodies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Aijeleth Shahar<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 22 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Hind of the Dawn” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune of ‘The Doe of the Morning’ ” (<span>niv<\/span>), “To the tune ‘Doe of the Dawn’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Al-taschith<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 57–59 and 75 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Do Not Destroy!’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Jonath-elem-rechokim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 56 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Dove on Far-off Terebinths” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune ‘Dove on Distant Oaks’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath Leannoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 88, is translated “To the tune ‘The Suffering of Affliction’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Muthlabben<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 9, is translated “To the tune ‘Death of the Son’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 45 and 69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim-Eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 80 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies of the Covenant’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shushan-eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 60, is translated “To the tune ‘Lily of the Testimony’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>These melody types appear only in the first three books of the Psalter, and this may imply that these popular <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span> had fallen into disuse by the time the final books of the Psalter were written. Other <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makam<\/span>-types had probably become popular, and the authors, realizing the relatively short life of a popular tune, did not include them in the headings of the Psalms but left the choice up to the performer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheNewTestament\">Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>First-Century Influences<\/h5>\n<h6>The Synagogue<\/h6>\n<p>By the time of Christ, the synagogue had become the chief place of worship for the Jewish people. It began as a place for study of the law but gradually became the center of worship for Jews unable to attend the temple. The liturgical service of the temple could not be duplicated in the synagogue as there was no sacrificial rite, and the music could not be exactly reproduced as there were no trained Levitical singers. Scholars do not agree about the amount of continuity between the music of the temple and the music of the synagogue, but there is evidence that certain musical practices did remain constant between the two places of worship.<\/p>\n<p>Information on the customs and rituals of the synagogue come from Talmudic writings. The musical elements of worship in the synagogue were the chanting of Scripture, psalmody, and spiritual songs. The choral singing of the temple was replaced by a single cantor. The cantor was a layman who, according to tradition, had to have the following qualifications: “He had to be well educated, gifted with a sweet voice, of humble personality, recognized by the community, conversant with Scripture and all the prayers; he must not be a rich man, for his prayers should come from his heart.” His most important job was the cantillation of the Law and the Prophets. A series of accents and punctuations, forerunners of actual musical notation, were indications for the cantor in the musical interpretation of the Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm singing was gradually transplanted from the temple to the synagogue, which in turn influenced the early Christian church. Gregorian psalm tones have their roots in Hebrew psalmody.<\/p>\n<h6>Greek and Roman Cultures<\/h6>\n<p>While both the temple and the synagogue were familiar to the early Christians (Acts 2:46-47; 3:1; 5:42; 9:20; 18:4; etc.), the Greek and Roman cultures also played a major part in shaping the young church. Hellenistic influences by the time of Christ had long been felt in the Middle East, and while it was strongly opposed by some Jewish leaders, the Greek arts had permeated Jewish culture. Greek philosophers considered music a cathartic force that could lead humans into metaphysical knowledge. This understanding led to the belief that music had a moral substance that could influence people to either good or evil. If this philosophy had totally encompassed Judeo-Christian thought, certainly Paul would have encouraged the use of music in the spread of the gospel. However, Paul’s omission of this theory implies that the Judeo-Christian world at that time had rejected the Greek ideal, at least in part.<\/p>\n<p>While the Jewish rabbis considered music an art form for the praise of God, and while the Greek philosophers thought of it as a powerful moral force in creation, the Romans considered music mainly as entertainment. The music of the Roman games was neither religious nor philosophic and, from the accounts of witnesses, it was not technically exceptional. In the Roman Empire musicians were given a lower status and looked on as mere entertainers. One reason the early church did not include instrumental music in their worship was in reaction to the debased secular use of instruments by the Romans.<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament Writings<\/h5>\n<p>One of the few mentions of instruments in the NT is the use of flutes at a wake (Mt 9:23). As in the OT, music is associated with feasting and merrymaking (e.g., the return of the prodigal son, Lk 15:25). Five passages mention music metaphorically (Mt 6:2; 11:17; Lk 7:32; 1 Cor 13:1; 14:7-8). The most well known of these is Paul’s celebration of love in 1 Corinthians 13. The denunciation of the gong and cymbals must be understood in light of the attitude of the early Christians toward the music of the Pharisees. Here the signal instruments of the temple were used to represent pompous display of religious pietism.<\/p>\n\n<p>Most references to music are found in the eschatological visions and prophetic passages scattered throughout the NT—most frequently in the book of Revelation (also Mt 24:31; 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thes 4:16; Heb 12:19). Many of these descriptions have a direct association with musical references in the OT (e.g., the use of harps and trumpets and the singing of the Hallelujah). But the value of many of the passages in Revelation comes from their literary style. These doxological and psalmlike passages were probably spontaneous “spiritual songs” composed by the young church (e.g., Rv 5:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The passages that mention religious or liturgical music are often more conceptual than literal. Two parallel passages describing the Last Supper (Mt 26:30; Mk 14:26) mention that Christ and his disciples sang a hymn. This is the only direct account of Jesus singing, but it is probable that when he read in the synagogue he did so in the accepted vocal style (Lk 4:16-20). There is much controversy surrounding the actual events at the Last Supper, but we can assume that the hymn sung was a traditional Jewish hymn, probably associated with the Passover.<\/p>\n<p>From the account in Acts 16:25 we know that Paul and Silas sang hymns while in jail. Paul gives instruction for music making in 1 Corinthians 14:15, 26 in terms of a balance between rationalism and emotion. And, as with all the gifts of the Spirit, Paul asks that singing be done for edification.<\/p>\n<p>In two similar passages (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16) Paul groups together three musical terms—psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. The singing of psalms was an obvious carryover from the synagogue, and we can assume that the early Christian psalm singing followed the Jewish style. The term for “hymns” probably refers to poetic texts, possibly modeled after the psalms, but in praise of Christ. “Spiritual songs” may refer to a spontaneous, ecstatic form of musical prayer, possibly wordless (perhaps related to glossolalia), in a style that was popular in mystical Judaism. These outbursts of song were probably melismatic (sung on one tone) and are perhaps the forerunners of the later Alleluia chant.<\/p>\n<h5>Hymnody in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>It can be assumed that the early Christians composed hymns in praise of Christ. Logically, most of the hymns found in the NT are based on Hebrew poetic psalm forms, but there is Greek and Latin influence also. The hymns from the Gospel of Luke have become well-known canticles adopted by the church: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (1:68-79), the Gloria (2:14) and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). While patterned after the psalms of the OT, these hymns are full of confidence in the salvation of Christ and in his imminent return. Other Christological hymns found in the NT include the prologue to the Gospel of John, Ephesians 2:14-16, Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20, 1 Timothy 3:16, Hebrews 1:3, and 1 Peter 3:18-22.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MUSIC A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship. The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human ...","summary_en":"MUSIC A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship. The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55053,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:30","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","summary_en":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82679,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:30","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","summary_en":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110305,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:30","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","summary_en":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137931,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:30","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:30<\/strong> <em>they sang a hymn:<\/em> Some have suggested that the <em>Great Hallel<\/em> (Ps 136) was sung.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","summary_en":"26:30 they sang a hymn: Some have suggested that the Great Hallel (Ps 136) was sung.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":24842,"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":28155,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offense Offend","title_en":"Offense Offend","content_ro":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","summary_en":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39120,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Zechariah","title_en":"Book of Zechariah","content_ro":"<h3>ZECHARIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpretation of this book. One thing that makes the book of Zechariah significant for the Christian is its use in the NT. The last part of Zechariah (chs 9–11) is the most quoted section of the Prophets in the Gospel Passion narratives, and, other than Ezekiel, Zechariah influenced the book of Revelation more than any other OT book.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Message<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Zechariah probably means “the Lord remembers” or “the Lord is renowned.” Zechariah is a common name in the OT and NT. At least 30 different people in the OT are named Zechariah. There is a problem in identifying the prophet’s father. In Zechariah 1:1 and 1:7, the prophet is called “the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo,” but in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 he is called simply “the son of Iddo.” There was another Zechariah in Isaiah’s time whose father was named Jeberechiah (Is 8:2). Another prophet by the name of Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, lived much earlier during the reign of Joash, king of Judah (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>). This prophet was stoned to death because he proclaimed that the Lord had forsaken his people because of their sins (2 Chr 24:20-22). Jesus seemed to refer to this or a similar unrecorded incident, but he calls the prophet the son of Berechiah, the last of the martyrs among the prophets (Mt 23:35). However, Luke’s account of what Jesus said about Zechariah (Lk 11:51) does not include the words “the son of Berechiah.” Since Jesus was quoting 2 Chronicles, which was the last book in the Hebrew Bible, he was simply indicating the sweep of time from the first murder (Abel) to the last (Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada). There is no evidence that the prophet of the book of Zechariah was martyred; therefore, the best solution to the problem is to consider Berechiah the father, and Iddo the grandfather, of this prophet.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The first part of the book of Zechariah (chs 1–8) is easy to date. The first date is in the first verse, “the eighth month of the second year of Darius.” This was Darius, king of Persia (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>). The eighth month of Darius’s second year would be October 520 <span>BC<\/span>. This date seems to be the first time the “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah. The second date in Zechariah is in 1:7: “On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month which is the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius . . .” (<span>rsv<\/span>). This date would be February 15, 519 <span>BC<\/span>. The word of the Lord that came to Zechariah on this date seems to include the account of eight night visions, along with some oracles, from an angel who talked with him. The third date in Zechariah is in 7:1: “In the fourth year of King Darius . . . on the fourth day of the ninth month, which is Chislev . . .” (<span>rsv<\/span>). This date would be the equivalent of December 7, 518 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>There are no dates in Zechariah 9–14. Zechariah’s name is never mentioned, and neither is Darius or any king. A period of relative peace and stability gives place to war. The temple is standing (11:13; 14:20), and evidently Greek soldiers are present (9:13). Any attempt to assign specific dates to Zechariah 9–14 would be speculation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nebuchadnezzar made several raids against Jerusalem before and after it fell, taking many captives to Babylon (cf. 2 Kgs 24:1-17; Dn 1:1). On two occasions, Jeremiah had predicted that captivity would last 70 years (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. Dn 9:2). In the time of Zechariah, the period of 70 years since the fall of Jerusalem was coming to an end (Zec 1:12; 7:5). It had been 66 years since Jerusalem fell, when the first “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah in the second year of Darius (520 <span>BC<\/span>). The Babylonian Empire had fallen to the Persians in 538 <span>BC<\/span>, and Cyrus the first king of Persia signed a decree permitting all captives to return to their homes (2 Chr 36:23; Ezr 1:1-4). Evidently, the first contingent of Jewish captives returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest about 536 <span>BC<\/span>. One of the first objectives of the returnees was to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:3), but internal strife and external opposition from the Samaritans prohibited the immediate rebuilding of the temple. After Darius I became king of Persia in 521 <span>BC<\/span>, a wave of expectation and enthusiasm swept over the Jewish communities in Jerusalem and Babylon. Two prophets, possibly from the Babylonian exiles, Haggai and Zechariah, began preaching so powerfully that work on the second temple began in 520 <span>BC<\/span> and was finished in 516 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1, 14-15; Hg 1–2; Zec 1–8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Zechariah opens in the second year of Darius (520 <span>BC<\/span>). Some of the captives had been back in Jerusalem for 16 years, but nothing was being done about rebuilding the temple. Zechariah’s first message called for the people to repent and not repeat the mistake of their fathers, whose sins and refusal to repent led to the exile and destruction of the temple (Zec 1:1-6). Then a series of eight night visions follows (1:7–6:8), assuring the people that the temple would be rebuilt by Zerubbabel (1:16; 4:9; 6:15). Two verses in Zechariah speak volumes concerning the hardships and difficulties in Jerusalem before the temple was rebuilt: “This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty says: Take heart and finish the task! You have heard what the prophets have been saying about building the Temple of the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty ever since the foundation was laid. Before the work on the Temple began, there were no jobs and no wages for either people or animals. No traveler was safe from the enemy, for there were enemies on all sides. I had turned everyone against each other” (8:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The first eight chapters of Zechariah are set against the social, political, and religious situations in Jerusalem from 520 to 518 <span>BC<\/span>. But beginning with chapter 9, historical moorings are lost. Chapter 9 opens with an oracle against Syria, including Damascus, Tyre, and Sidon, and against Philistia. Each of these places will be conquered and cleansed and will become like a clan in Judah. There is the promise of a new king coming triumphantly to Jerusalem, yet humbly riding on a donkey. His reign will be peaceful and universal. The next oracle speaks of setting the captives free, but this may not refer to the Babylonian captives, because of a reference to the Greeks. Zechariah 9–12 is almost wholly concerned with the future. Some scholars call this part apocalyptic literature. The nations attack Jerusalem and are defeated (chs 12, 14). The temple is standing (11:13), but it does not seem to have a place of great prominence in the new Jerusalem and in the kingdom of God (14:6-9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandMessage\">Purpose and Message<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book is to reassure and encourage. The restored Jewish community of 520 <span>BC<\/span> needed the assurance that the temple would be rebuilt, and later groups of God’s people needed to know that ultimately the kingdom of God would come in its fullness. There are three messages in the book of Zechariah: the need for repentance (1:1–5:11); the eight night visions (1:7–6:8) signifying that the temple would be rebuilt and God’s glory would return to Jerusalem; and the coming kingdom of God (chs 9–14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Zechariah may be divided into two main parts: chapters 1–8 and 9–14. The first part is dated between 520 <span>BC<\/span> and 518 <span>BC<\/span>. It consists of oracles and visions of Zechariah the son of Berechiah. Mainly prose, its primary concern is to assure the restored Jewish community that the temple will be rebuilt. The second part (chs 9–14) is undated. There are no references to Zechariah. The temple is standing, and much of the language is eschatological and apocalyptic. The second part itself has two parts: chapters 9–11 and 12–14. Chapters 9 and 12 begin essentially the same way: “The oracle of the word of the Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>The first part of Zechariah (chs 1–8) has four main sections: superscription and first oracle (1:1-6); eight night visions and related oracles (1:7–6:8); the symbolic crowning of Joshua (6:9-15); and the question about fasting and morality (7:1–8:23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\n<p>This section is dated specifically “in the eighth month” of the Babylonian calendar, which was from mid-October to mid-November. The second year of Darius, king of Persia, was 520 <span>BC<\/span>. The date is important in relating the work of Zechariah to that of Haggai (cf. Hg 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 18-20) and to the reconstruction of the temple under Zerubbabel. The first oracle concerns the need for repentance. The first message of Zechariah came between Haggai’s second and third message. He, like Haggai, probably attributed the failure of the crops and other hardships to a failure to rebuild the temple (cf. Hg 1:6-11). Zechariah calls for the people to repent so that they can persevere with work on the temple.<\/p>\n<h5>The Eight Night Visions and Related Oracles (1:7–6:8)<\/h5>\n<p>These visions that Zechariah saw in Jerusalem all seem to have been given on the night of the 24th day of the 11th month (Shebat) in the second year of Darius (mid-January to mid-February 519 <span>BC<\/span>). Seven of the eight visions have essentially the same form. Four of the visions begin with the words “Then I looked up and saw” (1:18; 2:1; 5:1; 6:1). One begins, “In a vision during the night” (1:8). Another begins, “Then the angel who had been talking with me returned and woke me, as though I had been asleep. ‘What do you see now?’ he asked” (4:1-2, <span>nlt<\/span>). Still another (the seventh) vision begins, “Then the angel who was talking with me came forward and said . . .” (5:5). However, the fourth vision is different from the other seven. It begins, “Then he showed me” (3:1, cf. Am 7:1, 4, 7). This message in the third person contains no interpreting angel nor any direct message to Zechariah, as if he were merely an observer. This fourth vision is so different from the other seven that it was not a part of the original series of eight.<\/p>\n<p>An overall pattern to the eight visions is not evident. Some scholars have seen some significance in the fact that the visions move from the evening or night in the first vision to the sunrise in the last vision. Others have detected some relationships in pairs of visions. The first and last visions involve horses and riders or chariots. The second and third visions involve the restoration of Judah and Jerusalem (1:18-21; 2:1-5). The fourth and fifth deal with the place of the two leaders in the restored community: Joshua will be cleansed and restored as the high priest (3:1-5) and Zerubbabel the governor will complete the temple (4:1-14). The sixth and seventh visions involve the cleansing of the land. A flying scroll enters the house of every thief and false witness and consumes it (5:1-4). Wickedness personified as a woman will be carried in an ephah (basket) to the land of Shinar (vv 5-11). Interspersed in the vision accounts are four oracles (1:14-17; 2:8-13; 3:6-10; 4:8-14). Each of these passages begins with the messenger formula, “Thus says the Lord,” or the expression “Cry out” (1:14, 17). The first oracle assures the people that the temple, the cities, and the choice of Jerusalem will be renewed. The second oracle exhorts any exiles remaining in Babylon to return to Judah and Jerusalem (2:7-12). Zechariah 2:12-13 are interesting. Verse 12 is the only OT reference to Palestine as “the Holy Land,” and verse 13 is similar to the call to worship in Habakkuk 2:20: “Be silent before the <span>Lord<\/span>, all humanity, for he is springing into action from his holy dwelling” (Zec 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). The third oracle in the visionary accounts concerns Joshua the high priest as a sign of the coming of God’s servant, the Branch who removes the guilt of the land in a single day (3:6-10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Symbolic Crowning of Joshua (6:9-15)<\/h5>\n<p>Zechariah is told to go into the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, take silver and gold from some returnees from Babylon, make a crown, and put it on the head of Joshua the priest as a symbol of the royal and priestly king, the Branch, the builder of the temple. After the ceremony the crown is to be hung in the temple as a memorial of those who gave the silver and the gold. The last verse (6:15) seems to say that just as gold and silver from exiles was used to symbolize the crowning of the coming king of the kingdom, so exiles, “those who are far off,” will also participate in the completion of the temple. Then Zechariah’s hearers will know God sent him to prophesy. This will all take place when and if they will diligently obey the voice of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Question about Fasting and Morality (7:1–8:23)<\/h5>\n<p>A delegation from Bethel (10 miles or 16.1 kilometers north of Jerusalem) came to Jerusalem in the fourth year of Darius (518 <span>BC<\/span>). Work on the temple had been going on for two years. The purpose of this visit was to entreat the favor of the Lord (7:2) and to ask the priests and the prophets if they should continue to fast as they had done since the temple was destroyed 70 years earlier (v 3). The Lord told Zechariah to ask why they were fasting—for the Lord or for selfish motives? The answer to the question of fasting seems to be that God desires truth, justice, and covenant-love more than fasting. Zechariah reiterates the message the Lord had already given his people by the former prophets. The last section in the first part of Zechariah is a decalogue of promises (8:1-23). The ten promises begin with the words “Thus says the Lord” or “The word of the Lord came to me.” The last word of God is not judgment but promise, hope, forgiveness, and restoration.<\/p>\n<h5>The Oracles of the Lord (chs 9–12)<\/h5>\n<p>The last half of the book of Zechariah (chs 9–14) falls into two nearly equal parts: chapters 9–11 (46 verses) and chapters 12–14 (44 verses). Each part begins with the words “An oracle” (9:1; 12:1). Both “oracles” are primarily eschatological. The first part (chs 9–11) is concerned with the restoration of the tribes to Palestine (9:11-17; 10:6-12). In order to accomplish this, the Lord will rid Palestine and Syria of opponents to his rule (9:1-8; 11:1-3), remove the evil shepherds (rulers; 10:2b-5; 11:4-17), and the Prince of Peace will come (9:9-10). The last “oracle” of Zechariah (12:1–14:21) is also eschatological. This time the concern is primarily that of Jerusalem and Judah. Twice Jerusalem is attacked by the nations (12:1-8; 14:1-5). Each time the Lord fights for Jerusalem, Judah, and the house of David. Jerusalem weeps and mourns for an unidentified martyr (12:10-14). The martyr could be called the “good” shepherd who is killed and his sheep scattered (13:7-9). Jesus referred to this passage in connection with his arrest (Mt 26:31; Mk 14:27). A fountain will be opened for the house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem will be cleansed from sin, idolatry, and false prophets (Zec 13:1-6). The new Jerusalem will remain aloft on its site and the land around it will be turned into a plain (14:10-11). There will be no night nor extreme temperatures in the new Jerusalem. Living waters will flow from Jerusalem, and the Lord will become King of all the earth. Those who fight against Jerusalem will be destroyed, but those who survive will worship the Lord year by year by keeping the Feast of Booths.<\/p>\n<p>The last scene in the book of Zechariah is a picture of the world after Armageddon, a new world cleansed of sin. It will be a time of peace and security. When God comes to reign, everything will become holy. The warhorses will become as holy as the priest’s turban, and the ordinary cooking vessel will be as temple vessels. The Canaanite or trader will be eliminated. There will be no difference between Jew and Gentile, as long as one worships the Lord of Hosts as King.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Zechariah (Person) #20.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZECHARIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpretation of this book. One thing that makes the book of Zechariah significant for the Christian is its use in the NT. The last part of Zechariah (chs 9–11) is the most quoted section of the Prophets in the Gospel Passion narratives, and, other than Ezekiel, Zechariah influenced the book of Revelation more than any other OT book.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Message<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Zechariah probably means “the Lord remembers” or “the Lord is renowned.” Zechariah is a common name in the OT and NT. At least 30 different people in the OT are named Zechariah. There is a problem in identifying the prophet’s father. In Zechariah 1:1 and 1:7, the prophet is called “the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo,” but in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 he is called simply “the son of Iddo.” There was another Zechariah in Isaiah’s time whose father was named Jeberechiah (Is 8:2). Another prophet by the name of Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, lived much earlier during the reign of Joash, king of Judah (835–796 <span>BC<\/span>). This prophet was stoned to death because he proclaimed that the Lord had forsaken his people because of their sins (2 Chr 24:20-22). Jesus seemed to refer to this or a similar unrecorded incident, but he calls the prophet the son of Berechiah, the last of the martyrs among the prophets (Mt 23:35). However, Luke’s account of what Jesus said about Zechariah (Lk 11:51) does not include the words “the son of Berechiah.” Since Jesus was quoting 2 Chronicles, which was the last book in the Hebrew Bible, he was simply indicating the sweep of time from the first murder (Abel) to the last (Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada). There is no evidence that the prophet of the book of Zechariah was martyred; therefore, the best solution to the problem is to consider Berechiah the father, and Iddo the grandfather, of this prophet.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The first part of the book of Zechariah (chs 1–8) is easy to date. The first date is in the first verse, “the eighth month of the second year of Darius.” This was Darius, king of Persia (521–486 <span>BC<\/span>). The eighth month of Darius’s second year would be October 520 <span>BC<\/span>. This date seems to be the first time the “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah. The second date in Zechariah is in 1:7: “On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month which is the month of Shebat, in the second year of Darius . . .” (<span>rsv<\/span>). This date would be February 15, 519 <span>BC<\/span>. The word of the Lord that came to Zechariah on this date seems to include the account of eight night visions, along with some oracles, from an angel who talked with him. The third date in Zechariah is in 7:1: “In the fourth year of King Darius . . . on the fourth day of the ninth month, which is Chislev . . .” (<span>rsv<\/span>). This date would be the equivalent of December 7, 518 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>There are no dates in Zechariah 9–14. Zechariah’s name is never mentioned, and neither is Darius or any king. A period of relative peace and stability gives place to war. The temple is standing (11:13; 14:20), and evidently Greek soldiers are present (9:13). Any attempt to assign specific dates to Zechariah 9–14 would be speculation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Nebuchadnezzar made several raids against Jerusalem before and after it fell, taking many captives to Babylon (cf. 2 Kgs 24:1-17; Dn 1:1). On two occasions, Jeremiah had predicted that captivity would last 70 years (Jer 25:11; 29:10; cf. Dn 9:2). In the time of Zechariah, the period of 70 years since the fall of Jerusalem was coming to an end (Zec 1:12; 7:5). It had been 66 years since Jerusalem fell, when the first “word of the Lord” came to Zechariah in the second year of Darius (520 <span>BC<\/span>). The Babylonian Empire had fallen to the Persians in 538 <span>BC<\/span>, and Cyrus the first king of Persia signed a decree permitting all captives to return to their homes (2 Chr 36:23; Ezr 1:1-4). Evidently, the first contingent of Jewish captives returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest about 536 <span>BC<\/span>. One of the first objectives of the returnees was to rebuild the temple (Ezr 1:3), but internal strife and external opposition from the Samaritans prohibited the immediate rebuilding of the temple. After Darius I became king of Persia in 521 <span>BC<\/span>, a wave of expectation and enthusiasm swept over the Jewish communities in Jerusalem and Babylon. Two prophets, possibly from the Babylonian exiles, Haggai and Zechariah, began preaching so powerfully that work on the second temple began in 520 <span>BC<\/span> and was finished in 516 <span>BC<\/span> (Ezr 5:1, 14-15; Hg 1–2; Zec 1–8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Zechariah opens in the second year of Darius (520 <span>BC<\/span>). Some of the captives had been back in Jerusalem for 16 years, but nothing was being done about rebuilding the temple. Zechariah’s first message called for the people to repent and not repeat the mistake of their fathers, whose sins and refusal to repent led to the exile and destruction of the temple (Zec 1:1-6). Then a series of eight night visions follows (1:7–6:8), assuring the people that the temple would be rebuilt by Zerubbabel (1:16; 4:9; 6:15). Two verses in Zechariah speak volumes concerning the hardships and difficulties in Jerusalem before the temple was rebuilt: “This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty says: Take heart and finish the task! You have heard what the prophets have been saying about building the Temple of the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty ever since the foundation was laid. Before the work on the Temple began, there were no jobs and no wages for either people or animals. No traveler was safe from the enemy, for there were enemies on all sides. I had turned everyone against each other” (8:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The first eight chapters of Zechariah are set against the social, political, and religious situations in Jerusalem from 520 to 518 <span>BC<\/span>. But beginning with chapter 9, historical moorings are lost. Chapter 9 opens with an oracle against Syria, including Damascus, Tyre, and Sidon, and against Philistia. Each of these places will be conquered and cleansed and will become like a clan in Judah. There is the promise of a new king coming triumphantly to Jerusalem, yet humbly riding on a donkey. His reign will be peaceful and universal. The next oracle speaks of setting the captives free, but this may not refer to the Babylonian captives, because of a reference to the Greeks. Zechariah 9–12 is almost wholly concerned with the future. Some scholars call this part apocalyptic literature. The nations attack Jerusalem and are defeated (chs 12, 14). The temple is standing (11:13), but it does not seem to have a place of great prominence in the new Jerusalem and in the kingdom of God (14:6-9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandMessage\">Purpose and Message<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book is to reassure and encourage. The restored Jewish community of 520 <span>BC<\/span> needed the assurance that the temple would be rebuilt, and later groups of God’s people needed to know that ultimately the kingdom of God would come in its fullness. There are three messages in the book of Zechariah: the need for repentance (1:1–5:11); the eight night visions (1:7–6:8) signifying that the temple would be rebuilt and God’s glory would return to Jerusalem; and the coming kingdom of God (chs 9–14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Zechariah may be divided into two main parts: chapters 1–8 and 9–14. The first part is dated between 520 <span>BC<\/span> and 518 <span>BC<\/span>. It consists of oracles and visions of Zechariah the son of Berechiah. Mainly prose, its primary concern is to assure the restored Jewish community that the temple will be rebuilt. The second part (chs 9–14) is undated. There are no references to Zechariah. The temple is standing, and much of the language is eschatological and apocalyptic. The second part itself has two parts: chapters 9–11 and 12–14. Chapters 9 and 12 begin essentially the same way: “The oracle of the word of the Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>The first part of Zechariah (chs 1–8) has four main sections: superscription and first oracle (1:1-6); eight night visions and related oracles (1:7–6:8); the symbolic crowning of Joshua (6:9-15); and the question about fasting and morality (7:1–8:23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superscription (1:1)<\/h5>\n<p>This section is dated specifically “in the eighth month” of the Babylonian calendar, which was from mid-October to mid-November. The second year of Darius, king of Persia, was 520 <span>BC<\/span>. The date is important in relating the work of Zechariah to that of Haggai (cf. Hg 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 18-20) and to the reconstruction of the temple under Zerubbabel. The first oracle concerns the need for repentance. The first message of Zechariah came between Haggai’s second and third message. He, like Haggai, probably attributed the failure of the crops and other hardships to a failure to rebuild the temple (cf. Hg 1:6-11). Zechariah calls for the people to repent so that they can persevere with work on the temple.<\/p>\n<h5>The Eight Night Visions and Related Oracles (1:7–6:8)<\/h5>\n<p>These visions that Zechariah saw in Jerusalem all seem to have been given on the night of the 24th day of the 11th month (Shebat) in the second year of Darius (mid-January to mid-February 519 <span>BC<\/span>). Seven of the eight visions have essentially the same form. Four of the visions begin with the words “Then I looked up and saw” (1:18; 2:1; 5:1; 6:1). One begins, “In a vision during the night” (1:8). Another begins, “Then the angel who had been talking with me returned and woke me, as though I had been asleep. ‘What do you see now?’ he asked” (4:1-2, <span>nlt<\/span>). Still another (the seventh) vision begins, “Then the angel who was talking with me came forward and said . . .” (5:5). However, the fourth vision is different from the other seven. It begins, “Then he showed me” (3:1, cf. Am 7:1, 4, 7). This message in the third person contains no interpreting angel nor any direct message to Zechariah, as if he were merely an observer. This fourth vision is so different from the other seven that it was not a part of the original series of eight.<\/p>\n<p>An overall pattern to the eight visions is not evident. Some scholars have seen some significance in the fact that the visions move from the evening or night in the first vision to the sunrise in the last vision. Others have detected some relationships in pairs of visions. The first and last visions involve horses and riders or chariots. The second and third visions involve the restoration of Judah and Jerusalem (1:18-21; 2:1-5). The fourth and fifth deal with the place of the two leaders in the restored community: Joshua will be cleansed and restored as the high priest (3:1-5) and Zerubbabel the governor will complete the temple (4:1-14). The sixth and seventh visions involve the cleansing of the land. A flying scroll enters the house of every thief and false witness and consumes it (5:1-4). Wickedness personified as a woman will be carried in an ephah (basket) to the land of Shinar (vv 5-11). Interspersed in the vision accounts are four oracles (1:14-17; 2:8-13; 3:6-10; 4:8-14). Each of these passages begins with the messenger formula, “Thus says the Lord,” or the expression “Cry out” (1:14, 17). The first oracle assures the people that the temple, the cities, and the choice of Jerusalem will be renewed. The second oracle exhorts any exiles remaining in Babylon to return to Judah and Jerusalem (2:7-12). Zechariah 2:12-13 are interesting. Verse 12 is the only OT reference to Palestine as “the Holy Land,” and verse 13 is similar to the call to worship in Habakkuk 2:20: “Be silent before the <span>Lord<\/span>, all humanity, for he is springing into action from his holy dwelling” (Zec 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). The third oracle in the visionary accounts concerns Joshua the high priest as a sign of the coming of God’s servant, the Branch who removes the guilt of the land in a single day (3:6-10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Symbolic Crowning of Joshua (6:9-15)<\/h5>\n<p>Zechariah is told to go into the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah, take silver and gold from some returnees from Babylon, make a crown, and put it on the head of Joshua the priest as a symbol of the royal and priestly king, the Branch, the builder of the temple. After the ceremony the crown is to be hung in the temple as a memorial of those who gave the silver and the gold. The last verse (6:15) seems to say that just as gold and silver from exiles was used to symbolize the crowning of the coming king of the kingdom, so exiles, “those who are far off,” will also participate in the completion of the temple. Then Zechariah’s hearers will know God sent him to prophesy. This will all take place when and if they will diligently obey the voice of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Question about Fasting and Morality (7:1–8:23)<\/h5>\n<p>A delegation from Bethel (10 miles or 16.1 kilometers north of Jerusalem) came to Jerusalem in the fourth year of Darius (518 <span>BC<\/span>). Work on the temple had been going on for two years. The purpose of this visit was to entreat the favor of the Lord (7:2) and to ask the priests and the prophets if they should continue to fast as they had done since the temple was destroyed 70 years earlier (v 3). The Lord told Zechariah to ask why they were fasting—for the Lord or for selfish motives? The answer to the question of fasting seems to be that God desires truth, justice, and covenant-love more than fasting. Zechariah reiterates the message the Lord had already given his people by the former prophets. The last section in the first part of Zechariah is a decalogue of promises (8:1-23). The ten promises begin with the words “Thus says the Lord” or “The word of the Lord came to me.” The last word of God is not judgment but promise, hope, forgiveness, and restoration.<\/p>\n<h5>The Oracles of the Lord (chs 9–12)<\/h5>\n<p>The last half of the book of Zechariah (chs 9–14) falls into two nearly equal parts: chapters 9–11 (46 verses) and chapters 12–14 (44 verses). Each part begins with the words “An oracle” (9:1; 12:1). Both “oracles” are primarily eschatological. The first part (chs 9–11) is concerned with the restoration of the tribes to Palestine (9:11-17; 10:6-12). In order to accomplish this, the Lord will rid Palestine and Syria of opponents to his rule (9:1-8; 11:1-3), remove the evil shepherds (rulers; 10:2b-5; 11:4-17), and the Prince of Peace will come (9:9-10). The last “oracle” of Zechariah (12:1–14:21) is also eschatological. This time the concern is primarily that of Jerusalem and Judah. Twice Jerusalem is attacked by the nations (12:1-8; 14:1-5). Each time the Lord fights for Jerusalem, Judah, and the house of David. Jerusalem weeps and mourns for an unidentified martyr (12:10-14). The martyr could be called the “good” shepherd who is killed and his sheep scattered (13:7-9). Jesus referred to this passage in connection with his arrest (Mt 26:31; Mk 14:27). A fountain will be opened for the house of David, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem will be cleansed from sin, idolatry, and false prophets (Zec 13:1-6). The new Jerusalem will remain aloft on its site and the land around it will be turned into a plain (14:10-11). There will be no night nor extreme temperatures in the new Jerusalem. Living waters will flow from Jerusalem, and the Lord will become King of all the earth. Those who fight against Jerusalem will be destroyed, but those who survive will worship the Lord year by year by keeping the Feast of Booths.<\/p>\n<p>The last scene in the book of Zechariah is a picture of the world after Armageddon, a new world cleansed of sin. It will be a time of peace and security. When God comes to reign, everything will become holy. The warhorses will become as holy as the priest’s turban, and the ordinary cooking vessel will be as temple vessels. The Canaanite or trader will be eliminated. There will be no difference between Jew and Gentile, as long as one worships the Lord of Hosts as King.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess; Zechariah (Person) #20.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZECHARIAH, Book of Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpreta...","summary_en":"ZECHARIAH, Book of Longest book of the Minor Prophets and the most difficult to understand. One reason for this difficulty is the numerous visions that call for an interpreter. At times an interpreting angel is present to tell what the vision means (Zec 1:9-10, 19-20; 4:1-6; 5:5-6), but at other times, when an interpretation is really needed, there is no angel to give one. The obscure meaning of many passages has spawned numerous theories concerning the date, authorship, unity, and interpreta...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55054,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:31","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","summary_en":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82680,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:31","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","summary_en":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110306,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:31","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","summary_en":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137932,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:31","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:31<\/strong> <em>God will strike:<\/em> In Zech 13:7-9, the <em>Shepherd<\/em><em>,<\/em> God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered <em>sheep<\/em> emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon <em>be scattered<\/em> and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","summary_en":"26:31 God will strike: In Zech 13:7-9, the Shepherd, God’s partner, is struck down (understood by Jesus as a prediction of his own death), and out of the scattered sheep emerge a purged, purified remnant of faithful ones (Zech 13:8-9). In the short term, the disciples would soon be scattered and deny association with Jesus (Matt 26:34, 56, 69-75).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62757,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90383,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118009,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145635,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":55055,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:32","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","summary_en":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82681,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:32","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","summary_en":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110307,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:32","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","summary_en":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137933,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:32","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:32<\/strong> Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","summary_en":"26:32 Jesus foresaw a time of restoration for the disciples despite their imminent abandonment of him (see ch 28; John 21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65249,"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":92875,"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":120501,"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":148127,"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}],"33":[{"id":42117,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69743,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97369,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124995,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":5049,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Birds","title_en":"Birds","content_ro":"<h3>BIRDS<\/h3>\n\n<p>Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult or impossible. The biblical languages were not highly specialized scientific languages. People in biblical times generally knew the difference between similar animals now categorized as separate species. For birds, however, they frequently used poetic, descriptive terms. Biblical scholars attempt to overcome the difficulties in identification by comparing the Hebrew words with similar words in related languages and by attention to the habitat, habits, and characteristics attributed to the birds in Scripture. Nevertheless, different scholars sometimes arrive at different identifications.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalReferencestoBirds\">Biblical References to Birds<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to birds both in literal and figurative senses. The biblical writers were keen observers of nature, their awareness of birds and bird life being reflected in many passages. They asserted that God knows all the birds (Ps 50:11) and cares for them (Mt 10:29). They saw God’s covenant with Noah after the flood, his promise never to destroy life again by flood, as extending even to the birds and animals (Gn 9:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law declared many birds “unclean,” mostly species that were scavengers or predators, or inhabited waste places. Centuries later the early Christians came to regard unclean species as clean by God’s decree, revealed in the apostle Peter’s vision (Acts 10:12). Other birds, like quail, sustained the Israelites in their wanderings (Ex 16:13). The Law prescribed birds as sacrifices for a firstborn child (Lk 2:24), for a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10), for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:22), and as a burnt offering and sin offering (12:8).<\/p>\n<p>Birds are easily subject to extinction, especially through human activity. God required the Israelites to practice conservation to prevent any birds from becoming extinct in the Holy Land, both for the birds’ sake and so the Israelites would have a continuous source of food. The Law allowed foraging Israelites to take eggs or the young from a bird’s nest, but they were not permitted to kill both a mother bird and her young (Dt 22:6).<\/p>\n<p>Biblical writers turned to nature frequently for illustrations of divine principles or human characteristics. Comparisons of humans to birds sometimes carry a sense of lowness, as when King Nebuchadnezzar developed claws like a bird in his madness (Dn 4:33), or when Job remarked that birds did not know the source of wisdom (Jb 28:21). In Jesus’ parable of the sower, the birds that ate the seed scattered by the wayside may represent indifference and a lack of spiritual understanding (Mt 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture also contains sympathetic images of the plight of birds. A lonely man praying was likened to a lonely bird on a housetop (Ps 102:7). If someone was unjustly hunted by his enemies, he would understand a hunted bird’s plight (Lam 3:52). Birds were said to be affected by curses on evildoers as they fled from Jerusalem or from the face of the earth (Jer 9:10; Zep 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of such misfortune visited upon birds, Scripture affirms that, like other creatures, they are cared for and delighted in by God (Ps 50:11; Mt 6:26; 10:29). Both Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar were compared to a tree that gives shelter to the birds (Ez 31:6; Dn 4:12; cf. 2:38). Human power, however, fails eventually as when the tree representing Nebuchadnezzar was cut down, forcing the birds to flee (Dn 4:14). God’s protection, by contrast, is unfailing. Jesus likened the kingdom of God to a mustard seed, growing to become a shelter for birds (Mt 13:32). God provides a habitation for birds (Ps 104:12), although Jesus, the Son of Man, had nowhere to rest his head (Mt 8:20).<\/p>\n<p>Birds were considered evidence of God’s handiwork (Jb 12:7). Bird lore provided examples of good sense in learning from a mistake (Prv 1:17; 6:5) and of bad judgment in failing to avoid the snares of immorality (7:23). Birds and other creatures could be tamed, unlike the wicked human tongue (Jas 3:7). Birds flying without alighting were an image of an undeserved curse (Prv 26:2). Without trust in God, people might be forced by evil to flee like a bird to the mountains (Ps 11:1). Birdsong was said to bring joy (Sg 2:12). The return of God’s people to the Promised Land would be like birds returning (Hos 11:11). Jesus expressed his love for Jerusalem by saying that he longed to gather his people to himself as a hen gathers her brood under her wing (Mt 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, birds were occasionally regarded as ominous signs. For example, Pharaoh’s baker learned of impending death because in a dream birds ate the food from a basket on his head (Gn 40:17). Solomon warned against cursing the king, even in private, because “a little bird may tell them what you said” (Eccl 10:20). A vivid biblical image is that of scavenging, carrion-eating birds consuming the bodies of evildoers. To the Israelites, such a desecration of humanity was an image of ultimate horror (Dt 28:26; 1 Sm 17:44; Is 46:11; Jer 7:33; 12:9; Ez 29:5; 39:4; Rv 19:17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IndividualSpecies\">Individual Species<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Bittern\">Bittern<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged wading bird <em>(Botaurus stellaris)<\/em> similar to the heron, but with shorter legs and a smaller, more compact body. Bitterns inhabit marshes, where it is easy for them to hide with their natural camouflage. A bittern’s mottled plumage of barred brown and black so duplicates the color and shape of swamp vegetation that at times the bird seems to disappear before the observer’s eyes. The neck is covered with long, soft feathers, making it appear disproportionately heavy. Bitterns are wary and solitary. During mating season the bittern’s larynx is modified to produce a mysterious-sounding cry. The body twists in an unusual manner in harmony with the notes. Bitterns nest alone in grassy marshes. Because they are shy, they have become symbols of places of desolation and loneliness.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the bittern is actually mentioned in the Bible. The <span>kjv<\/span> has “bittern” in three places (Is 14:23; 34:11; Zep 2:14). Many biblical scholars believe the Hebrew word in those verses refers not to the bittern but to the hedgehog (Is 14:23; Zep 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>) or porcupine (Is 34:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Hebrew word is similar to an Arabic word meaning “porcupine.” Other scholars point out that the references suggest a bird rather than a mammal, especially Zephaniah 2:14, which speaks of the creature making its “lodge in her capitals” (i.e., above Nineveh’s doorposts). Bitterns are particularly abundant in the swamps of the Tigris River (near Nineveh). The bittern’s characteristics may fit the references in the three passages better than do the hedgehog’s.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hedgehog; Animals (Porcupine).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Buzzard\">Buzzard<\/p>\n<p>Hawklike soaring bird <em>(Buteo vulgaris<\/em> or <em>Buteo ferox).<\/em> It resembles the kite, though its tail is straight and not cleft. It is mentioned in the list of unclean birds (Dt 14:13). But other translations render the word as “glede” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “kite” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). The parallel list in Leviticus 11, however, substitutes “kite” (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or “vulture” (<span>kjv<\/span>) for “buzzard.” Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the buzzard is actually mentioned in the Bible, even though it is a common resident of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Like other great soaring birds, the buzzard is noted for its sharp eyesight, and may be the bird mentioned for that quality in Job 28:7 (variously translated “falcon,” “eagle,” or “vulture”). It will trail its prey for hours, and has a remarkable ability to see a carcass on which it descends to feed. Somewhat larger than the common buzzard is the long-legged buzzard, found in Israel, western Asia, and Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kestrel; Kite; Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cormorant\">Cormorant<\/p>\n<p>Large, black gooselike bird <em>(Phalacrocorax carbo),<\/em> repeatedly depicted in art from Egypt and the Holy Land. Its length varies from 19 to 40 inches (48.3 to 101.6 centimeters). Its feet have webs between all four toes. The feet, attached far back on the body, serve as propellers when the cormorant dives to catch its meal of fish, crustacea, or amphibia. The long bill is curved at the tip, and under the bill is a sac in which the cormorant keeps the captured fish.<\/p>\n<p>Cormorants live in large companies, making nests of sticks and other vegetation that they carry to trees or to rocky shelves near coasts. Up to four eggs are incubated, and the young are fed by both parents.<\/p>\n<p>The cormorant frequents swamps around the Sea of Galilee, Lake Huleh (the waters of Merom), and the Mediterranean coast. Its Hebrew name originally denoted the “hurling down” of the bird at its prey. Cormorants dive into deep water and sometimes seem to zoom beneath the surface in their hunt for fish. The cormorant’s greed is proverbial. It was ceremonially unclean for the Israelites (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Pelican (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Crane\">Crane<\/p>\n<p>Tall wading birds <em>(Grus grus)<\/em> resembling storks and herons but with shorter talons. The plumage has a silvery gloss and the tail feathers are wavy. Large flocks of cranes flying in wedge-shaped formations pass over the Holy Land during the daylight hours each fall on their way to Africa from the northern countries of Europe and again in the spring when they return north to breed. Migratory flocks may number as many as 2,000 birds. Jeremiah 8:7 refers to the crane’s migratory habits.<\/p>\n<p>The usual call of the crane is best described as a bellow, but during migratory flight they emit a chattering sound that may be referred to in Isaiah 38:14. Cranes have remarkably powerful voices, their calls seeming to carry for miles. Migrating flocks usually have a flock leader who does the calling.<\/p>\n<p>A crane’s height may reach 40 to 60 inches (101.6 to 152.4 centimeters). Except for the ostrich, the crane is the tallest bird ever to inhabit the Holy Land. A crane’s wingspread may exceed 90 inches (228.6 centimeters). The overall color is steel gray; the head and neck are black with a longitudinal white stripe. The crane feeds on land rather than in shallow water. It feeds primarily on grass and grain yet may devour insects, snakes, small alligators, frogs, and worms, using its long, powerful bill as a sharp hammer for killing such creatures.<\/p>\n<p>The crane usually nests in solitary places, often in shallow water or nearby. Its nest is a mass of vegetation, holding two or three eggs that are light-colored with darker spots.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cuckoo\">Cuckoo<\/p>\n<p>Small, drab brown bird known for its parasitic habits. The term the <span>kjv<\/span> used in Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15 may refer either to the common cuckoo <em>(Cuculus canorus)<\/em> or to the great spotted cuckoo <em>(Clamator glandarius).<\/em> The bird acts as a brood parasite, laying its eggs in the nest of another species after pushing out one of the eggs of the host species. The young cuckoo hatches before the young of the host species and evicts the other young. The foster parents raise it as their own.<\/p>\n<p>The cuckoo, an insect eater, is considered ritually unclean in Scripture, which might imply that it is a predator or carrion-eater. For that reason some believe the Hebrew word actually refers to the seagull or sea mew rather than the cuckoo. Gulls, terns, and petrels are all common on the seashore and lakes of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars believe that the Hebrew word refers not to the cuckoo but to one of the owls, possibly the long-eared owl.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Seagull (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Eagle\">Eagle<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey, genus <em>Aquila.<\/em> Vultures were often confused with eagles, making identification of the biblical birds difficult. Eagles’ heads are not bald as are the heads of vultures, but from a distance they appear similar. It is possible that the Hebrew word translated “eagle” (which literally means “to tear with the beak”) may have referred to all large birds of prey, eagles and vultures alike. A number of references to the eagle in Scripture are actually references to the griffon vulture (e.g., Hos 8:1; perhaps Mt 24:28). In certain passages, however, the true eagle may be meant.<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Land has several varieties of eagle, including the imperial eagle <em>(Aquila heliaca)<\/em> and the less common golden eagle <em>(Aquila chrysaetos).<\/em> These birds are powerfully built with strong wings; their movements reveal suppleness and strength. A distinctive hooked beak, which enhances the eagle’s dignified and somewhat ferocious appearance, provides it with an effective instrument for tearing and killing prey. Short, powerful legs and prehensile claws enable an eagle to apply an almost unbreakable grip on a struggling victim. The strong talons have sharp points and edges. The eagle hunts by day.<\/p>\n<p>For Jeremiah and other prophets, the eagle was the epitome of swiftness. The golden eagle, which can fly three or four miles (5–7 kilometers) in ten minutes, may have evoked the comparisons in 2 Samuel 1:23;Jeremiah 4:13; 49:22; Lamentations 4:19 (<span>kjv<\/span>), and Habakkuk 1:8. Moses used a similar comparison to emphasize the sudden striking power of a hostile enemy (Dt 28:49). The author of Proverbs, observing the high altitude to which the eagle soars, applied that image to the human situation (Prv 23:4-5; cf. Rv 12:14).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle’s strength and invincibility were mentioned often with reference to powerful nations attacking Israel. The prophet Ezekiel described Nebuchadnezzar as an eagle (Ez 17:3). Both the Babylonians and Assyrians frequently depicted the eagle in their art, especially as a deity with a man’s body and an eagle’s head. Nebuchadnezzar even had an experience of temporary insanity in which “his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws” (Dn 4:33, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle builds its nest on inaccessible mountain peaks or at the top of the tallest trees, a fact noted by Jeremiah (Jer 49:16; cf. Jb 39:27-28; Ob 1:4). The brood consists of two or occasionally three eggs. Only the female sits on the nest, but the young eaglets are fed by both parents. Eagles are devoted to their offspring and train them with great care in the art of flying. Some commentators interpret Exodus 19:4 and Deuteronomy 32:11 as evidence of the eagle’s practice of catching its young on its wings. There is virtually no evidence from observation, however, that any eagle can perform such a feat. In some versions the wording avoids a direct statement that eagles bear their young on their wings.<\/p>\n<p>Some eagles in captivity have lived to an age of over 100 years. This remarkable longevity caused the psalmist to speak of the eagle whose youth is renewed (Ps 103:5). Confronted by its impressive qualities, biblical authors observed the eagle with awe and wonder (Jb 39:27-30; Prv 30:18-19). Those awesome qualities also contributed to several prophetic visions, including Ezekiel’s vision of a creature with an eagle’s face (Ez 1:10) and the apostle John’s vision of a holy beast like a flying eagle (Rv 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"FowlDomestic\">Fowl, Domestic<\/p>\n<p>Domesticated poultry <em>(Gallus gallus domesticus),<\/em> probably derived from the red jungle fowl of India. They seem to have been known already in OT times (Prv 30:31). A seal of Jaazaniah (see 2 Kgs 25:23), dating from about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, bears the image of a fighting cock. A reference to fowls or poultry for Nehemiah’s table, however, may be to wild game rather than domestic fowl (Neh 5:18).<\/p>\n<p>Poultry symbolized fertility, and the Jews carried a cock and hen in front of bridal couples at weddings. The motherly concern of hens gathering their broods was familiar to Jesus’ hearers (Mt 23:37; Lk 13:34).<\/p>\n<p>Since roosters habitually crow an hour or two before dawn, the third watch of the night, from midnight to 3:00 <span>am<\/span>, was known as the cockcrow. According to the Talmud (a commentary on Jewish law), keeping chickens was prohibited in Jerusalem in NT times to prevent the insects and larvae that breed in chicken droppings from contaminating sacrificial flesh. For that reason the cock that Peter heard (Mt 26:34, 74; Lk 22:34, 60-61) probably belonged to Romans living there or to Jews who did not follow Jewish regulations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GoatsuckerorNightHawk\">Goatsucker or Night Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Migratory bird, dark in color and short-legged, similar to the American whippoorwill. The goatsucker (genus <em>Caprimulgus<\/em>) resembles an owl with a flat head, large eyes, soft plumage, and a noiseless flight. It hunts insects at night, catches them on the wing, and during the day rests on branches. Goatsuckers were so named because they were thought by the ancients to milk goats. According to Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15, they were ritually unclean. Although some scholars believe that an owl is intended, there seems to be good reason to accept the “night hawk” translation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Goose\">Goose<\/p>\n<p>Long-necked, web-footed water birds with waterproof feathers (genus <em>Anser<\/em>). Domestic geese were known to the Greeks of Homer’s day, since they are mentioned in the <em>Odyssey.<\/em> They were domesticated in Egypt perhaps as early as the Old Kingdom (c. 2500 <span>BC<\/span>) and certainly by the time of the New Kingdom (c. 1500– 1100 <span>BC<\/span>). They were used for food and sacrifice. The breeding of geese was widespread in Canaan in biblical times; ivory carvings of the 13th or 12th century <span>BC<\/span> showing geese have been found in excavations at Megiddo in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Many species of geese spend most of their lives on land even though they are waterfowl; some even build their nests in trees. Wild geese tend to inhabit flatlands and prairies rather than mountainous terrain.<\/p>\n<p>Geese may have graced the table of King Solomon. In 1 Kings 4:23 they are referred to as “fatted fowl,” a term that may also refer to ducks, swans, guineas, pigeons, or other domestic edible birds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hawk\">Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Small birds of prey found in the Holy Land. Most references are probably to the sparrow hawk <em>(Accipter nisus).<\/em> This bird is slightly larger than the kestrel, has a grayish-brown back and a white belly with black and brown bars. It has short feathers, long, curved talons, and broad wings, rounded at the outer ends, which enable it to soar on updrafts. The long tail, acting as a rudder, helps the bird change its course swiftly in flight. It is hence very maneuverable in the air when chasing warblers or other small birds. It does not seize its prey on the ground, as does the kestrel, but hunts and attacks small birds in flight. Hawks hunt in the daytime, unlike owls that are adapted for nighttime hunting. With their eyes located on the side of the head, hawks are very keen-sighted. They usually nest in tall trees and their nests are often occupied by the same pair year after year.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians embalmed sparrow hawks and regarded all hawks highly. The god Horus was depicted with the head of a hawk hawk was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). It was not a permanent resident of Israel but stopped off as it migrated from north to south. Its southward migration is mentioned in Job 39:26. A reference in Isaiah 34:11 to “hawk” (“cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>) is uncertain. <em>See<\/em> Kestrel or Falcon; Kite (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Heron\">Heron<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (genus <em>Ardea<\/em>) with a long, thin neck and long legs. It has a characteristic comblike growth on the inner side of the third toe.<\/p>\n<p>Herons are generally white, blue, green, or gray. They nest together in rookeries, and both parents bring in food for the young. Herons feed on fish, small reptiles, and insects, gulping them down in one swallow. Adults and young migrate in the late fall to warm southern climates. The white heron attains a length of more than 3 feet (.9 meter), whereas the dwarf heron is only about 22 inches (55.9 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>At least seven varieties of heron are reported in the Holy Land. The white ibis, or buff-backed heron (<em>Buphus russatus<\/em>), was probably the most common species. The purple heron <em>(Ardea purpureus)<\/em> is a summer breeder found in all parts of the Holy Land where there is standing water.<\/p>\n<p>The blue-gray heron (<em>Ardea cinerea<\/em>) winters in southern Europe and North Africa, migrating to northern Europe in the early spring. In Israel it builds its winter nest near water, in swamps and along riverbanks, where it feeds on fish and frogs. It will stand patiently in the water for hours, and then suddenly its long, pointed beak darts down with lightning speed to catch its prey. Often the blue-gray heron builds its nest in a tall tree to which it may return year after year.<\/p>\n<p>According to Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18, the heron was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites. Some scholars believe those references are to the cormorant, but most scholars think they refer to one of the herons.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cormorant (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hoopoe\">Hoopoe<\/p>\n<p>One of the Holy Land’s most beautiful birds (<em>Upupa epops<\/em>). It has vividly colored plumage, a lovely crown-shaped crest that becomes erect when the bird is alarmed, and a long, slender curved bill. The pinkish-brown hoopoe is about 11 inches (27.9 centimeters) long, with black and white bands on its back, tail, and wings. Hoopoes are basically desert-dwelling birds.<\/p>\n<p>The name “hoopoe” is derived from the sound of the bird’s call. To emit the sound, the neck feathers are puffed up and the head snapped in the air. When on the ground, the bird hammers its beak into the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The hoopoe arrives in the Holy Land in February, breeds in the summer, and leaves in September. It was held in religious reverence by the Egyptians. It was listed as ritually unclean (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18), probably because it searches for grubs and small insects in such unsanitary places as dunghills.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ibis\">Ibis<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (<em>Threskiornis aethiopica<\/em>) presently unknown in the Holy Land but possibly known there in biblical times. It was well known in ancient Egypt, where it was sacred to the god Thoth. Today it has practically vanished with the disappearance of swamps along the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the ibis is meant in Leviticus 11:17, where it is classified as ceremonially unclean. The same Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 14:16 and Isaiah 34:11 is translated “great owl,” a translation preferred by most scholars.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl, Great (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KestrelorFalcon\">Kestrel or Falcon<\/p>\n<p>Small hawk (<em>Falco tinnunculus<\/em>) about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long with brown, black, and yellow feathers on its breast. It was abundant in the Holy Land in villages and in the countryside, nesting on rooftops and among rocks. Like most hawks, the kestrel is able to hover and float in midair and then swoop down on its prey, seizing it with sharp, hooklike talons. It feeds largely on mice, small reptiles, and insects.<\/p>\n<p>Embalmed kestrels have been found in ancient Egyptian tombs. The Egyptians also embalmed the hunting kestrel <em>(Falco cherug),<\/em> which can be tamed and trained to hunt rabbits and other small game. Falconry (hunting with hawks of various species) was well known among the ancients and is still practiced today. That the Assyrians were familiar with falconry is seen in the records of Ashurbanipal. Because the kestrel is a predator, it was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:14). Some translations render the word as “kite” (Lv 11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>; Dt 14:13, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>), an illustration of the difficulty of identifying biblical birds precisely.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kite or Glede (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KiteorGlede\">Kite or Glede<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey <em>(Milvus milvus).<\/em> The average length of the kite is about 19 inches (48.3 centimeters). The upper part is generally dark, but the belly is white. Kites nest high in trees and build nests of vegetation, including sticks. They rarely have more than two or three young, which they feed on snakes, grasshoppers, and so on. Sometimes kites are called snake hawks.<\/p>\n<p>The kite is a migratory bird that stays in Israel during the summer, especially in the mountains of southern Judea, in the trackless wastes west of the Dead Sea, and in the wilderness of Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The red kite or glede is a medium-sized bird of prey. The edges of the upper part of the bill overlap with the lower one, forming sharp scissors. The tail is forked or cleft like that of a fish. Its loud cry often includes sharp whistling notes. Other Holy Land species include the black kite <em>(Milvus migrans)<\/em> and the black-winged kite <em>(Elanus caeruleus).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The kite is listed among the unclean birds in Mosaic law (Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13), but the precise identification of the birds mentioned there is disputed by some scholars and translators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Buzzard; Kestrel or Falcon (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Lammergeier\">Lammergeier<\/p>\n<p>Largest of the vultures and less common than the other members of the family. It is grayish brown with white streaks and has a black tuft of stiff hairs in the facial area that gives it the name “bearded vulture.” Another name for it is “lamb vulture.”<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier <em>(Gypaetus barbatus)<\/em> has a unique way of killing its prey; since its beak is not particularly powerful it carries its victim high in the air and then drops it on rocks.<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier is especially partial to tortoises and to marrow bone. After jackals and smaller vultures have reduced a carcass to bone, the lammergeier crushes the bones to obtain the marrow, or swallows the pieces intact. Hence it is also known as the ossifrage, from a Latin word meaning “bone crusher.” The lammergeier was unclean in Mosaic law (Lv 11:13; Dt 14:13; both translated “vulture” in <span>nlt<\/span> and “ossifrage” in <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ostrich\">Ostrich<\/p>\n<p>Two-toed, swift-running, flightless bird (<em>Struthio camelus<\/em>) that lives in deserts or in areas covered with stunted bushes.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times ostriches ranged as far north as Syria and were found over the entire wasteland of the Negev Desert, but they have since become extinct there. Its Hebrew name means “daughter of the desert.” It is the largest of all living birds, attaining a height of about 10 feet (3 meters) and a weight of 175 pounds (79.5 kilograms), though some males may weigh as much as 300 pounds (136.4 kilograms). The female is considerably smaller. Powerful thighs and long legs give the ostrich great speed, reported to be as high as 40 <span>mph<\/span> (64 <span>kph<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ostrich is omnivorous. It eats grass, fruits, small mammals, birds, snakes, and lizards, as well as large pebbles that assist in the breakdown of food in its gizzard. The ostrich is hunted, but its eggs are generally more sought after than the bird itself. The empty shells are traded throughout the Mediterranean area for use as utensils, or when broken up as raw material for beads. The eggs—as many as 25 in one clutch—are laid in a shallow nest of sand, with some left uncovered. They may appear to be neglected by day, but only because they are ordinarily incubated at night. The cock does most of the incubating; the female participates only during cold days. The strong, thick eggshell protects the embryo from the heat of the desert.<\/p>\n<p>Occasionally the ostrich is used for riding or even for pulling small carts. Ostrich feathers are in great demand. Ostrich plumes graced ancient royal courts as fans. An ivory-handled fan of Pharaoh Tutankhamen (King Tut) had lovely ostrich plumes. The plumes are white in the male and brownish gray in the female. The reputation of the ostrich for stupidity comes from its behavior when hunted and cornered; it fails to take evasive action even when doing so would save it. In open country, however, it is very wary and runs at great speed to escape. In contrast to the partridge, an ostrich will run away from its eggs and chicks when pursued.<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to ostriches emphasize their negative characteristics. They were regarded as unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). Several references associate ostriches with images of wilderness and desolation (Jb 30:29; Is 13:21; 34:13; 43:20; Jer 50:39). Their night cry, which has been compared to an ox’s lowing in pain, is referred to in Micah 1:8. Biblical writers also noted the apparent indifference of the ostrich to its brood (Jb 39:13-18; Lam 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Owl\">Owl<\/p>\n<p>Nocturnal birds (order Strigiformes) with large heads and large, forward-looking eyes. Their wing and tail feathers are soft as velvet, helping to make their flight noiseless. The owl’s body is small and slender, about the size of a pigeon, but it appears bulky because of the thick covering of feathers. Owls have been considered bearers of misfortune and omens of disaster. In the Near East, owls now live in temple ruins and pyramids in Egypt, and in rock-hewn graves, ruins, and caves on both sides of the Jordan River in Israel. They seldom come near inhabited dwellings.<\/p>\n<p>Owls have excellent night vision, which they use to capture rodents or other animals. Although unusually large, the owl’s eyes are almost useless in the daylight because the light dazzles them. The owl is able to swallow its prey whole because of its elastic esophagus. Indigestible hair and bones are regurgitated as pellets. The bill is short but sharply hooked.<\/p>\n<p>Owls may lay up to ten eggs. The young are cared for on the nest by both parents. Both adults and young tend to remain in the area in which they were hatched. Eight species of owls are found in the Holy Land, of which five are plentiful. It is difficult, however, to identify a particular species with any of the four Hebrew words translated “owl” in Scripture. A fifth word translated “owl” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is more appropriately identified with the ostrich (<span>rsv<\/span>). Owls appear in the lists of unclean birds (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:16), and although translations differ, they concur that all species of owls, being predators, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ostrich (above); Owl, Barn or White; Owl, Great; Owl, Little; Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlBarnorWhite\">Owl, Barn or White<\/p>\n<p>Large owl <em>(Tyto alloa)<\/em> with a distinct heart-shaped face. It may get its Hebrew name from a snoring sound it makes when breathing in the nest. In flight it emits a frightening screech, and thus is sometimes referred to as the screech owl. Its somewhat sinister features—a large head and wide pop eyes—have led some people to consider it demonic, but they have also inspired another name, the monkey-faced owl. It is a useful bird, however, devouring rodents that raid fields and damage stored grain. Like other owls, it sleeps during the day and hunts at night with a well-developed sense of hearing and sight. Its color is light brownish yellow with a white mask around the eyes and cheeks. The whole leg is covered with feathers that protect it against the bites of struggling victims in its talons.<\/p>\n<p>Some modern translations mention the barn or white owl by name (Lv 11:17, <span>njb<\/span>; 11:18, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>njb<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above), Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlGreat\">Owl, Great<\/p>\n<p>Large owl, standing nearly two feet (60.9 centimeters) tall <em>(Asio otus).<\/em> The color is mouse gray with gray-brown spots and black stripes. As one of its names indicates, it has tufted “ears” and is sometimes called the great horned owl. It feeds on rodents, such as rats and mice. It winters in Israel among ruins and in groves.<\/p>\n<p>The great owl may be the owl mentioned in the Bible among the birds of desolation that will inhabit devastated Edom (Is 34:11, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). It is also mentioned by name in some translations of the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlLittle\">Owl, Little<\/p>\n<p>Smallest of all nocturnal birds of prey. Chiefly insectivorous, the little owl <em>(Athene noctua glaux)<\/em> also feeds at times on tiny birds. It is the most common owl in the Holy Land, dwelling among ruins, tombstones, rocks, and thickets (perhaps the owl of Ps 102:6). Its voice sounds like that of a dying person. On occasion it may be observed perched on a rock with its large eyes gazing off into the distance, a pose that the ancients considered a sign of wisdom. The Greeks associated the little owl with the goddess Athena. It is mentioned by name in several translations (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlScops\">Owl, Scops<\/p>\n<p>Small owl <em>(Otus scops)<\/em> distinguished by two horn-shaped crests of hairlike feathers on its head. It perches in an inclined posture and hops and dances like a goat. During the hatching period, the male’s hooting sounds like a moan. The scops owl feeds on insects, rodents, and birds. During invasions of mice or locusts, these owls have appeared in large flocks and helped to destroy the pests. They have been known to attack humans who intrude on their nests. They are well-known inhabitants of Eurasia and Africa.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that the scops is the true screech owl, because of its whistling calls that resound through the night. The screech owl is mentioned only once in Scripture (Is 34:14, <span>kjv<\/span>), but that translation is the subject of scholarly debate. Following traditional Jewish mythology, some translations use the Hebrew word <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">lilith<\/span><em>)<\/em> as a proper name. In Jewish tradition Lilith was a witch-demon who, before Eve’s creation, was Adam’s wife. She became the mother of demons and was thought to attack children during the night; thus the name “Lilith” is translated “night hag” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “night monster” (<span>nasb<\/span>). Most scholars favoring the mythical interpretation, however, suggest that Isaiah was using a popular legend to evoke a sense of desolation and did not himself believe in the existence of Lilith. There is little support for “screech owl” as an appropriate translation of the name.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Owl, Barn or White (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Partridge\">Partridge<\/p>\n<p>Most common game bird in the Holy Land. The partridge resembles a chicken in its basic anatomy but has a less chunky body and a longer tail. Two species of partridge inhabit the Holy Land: the sand partridge <em>(Ammoperdix heyi),<\/em> found near the Dead Sea, in the Jordan River valley, and in the Sinai Desert; and the chukar partridge <em>(Alectoris graeca).<\/em> The sand partridge is a medium-sized bird with yellow feet. The male has sandy-buff plumage, upper tail feathers penciled and barred with brown, and a chestnut and white undersurface. The female is a grayish buff. The chukar partridge resembles the common French partridge of Europe, having a body about 16 inches (40.6 centimeters) long. It is covered with beautiful and radiantly colored feathers.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical reference (1 Sm 26:20; probably the sand partridge because of the geographical context) alludes to the common method of catching it by chasing. It was also hunted with snares (cf. Ps 91:3) or by hunters hiding in a blind. The fast-running partridge soon becomes exhausted, which enables hunters to run it to the ground and kill it. Nevertheless, by running and jumping, it can ascend very steep cliffs. The bird finds refuge among bushes into which its brownish-green feathers blend protectively. If it were not such a prolific breeder, it would probably have become extinct by being hunted for food.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical description of the partridge gathering a brood she did not hatch (Jer 17:11) seems to be based on the fact that the hen lays at least two clutches of eggs, one for herself and one for the cock to incubate.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Peacock\">Peacock<\/p>\n<p>Member of the quail, partridge, and pheasant family, the peacock <em>(Pavo cristatus)<\/em> is actually the male peafowl. Its mate is properly known as the peahen. The male attracts attention because of a stately, luxurious appearance enhanced by magnificent feathers. The breast is a brilliant metallic blue, and each tail feather has a brilliant eye near the tip. When lowered, the unusually long tail feathers form a train behind the peacock on the ground, giving it an overall length of up to six feet (1.8 meters). The train can also be raised to form a huge fan adorned with the multicolored eyes. During courtship the feathers are raised and vibrated to make a distinct rustling noise. The rather drab peahen lacks the long train.<\/p>\n<p>Because it is not native to the Holy Land, the peacocks referred to in 1 Kings 10:22 and 2 Chronicles 9:21 are thought by some scholars to be Old World monkeys or baboons brought from east Africa, or guinea hens from the upper Nile River region. There is evidence, however, that the Phoenicians introduced peacocks to the Egyptian pharaoh, perhaps as early as the time of King Solomon. It is possible that Solomon’s trade expeditions ranged as far as India, where the peacock is native. The peacock was also well known to the Greeks and Romans. Alexander the Great prized its beauty and forbade his soldiers to kill the bird.<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian church the peacock became a symbol of the immortality promised in the resurrection of Christ. In addition, the eyes of its tail came to represent the all-seeing eye of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Pelican\">Pelican<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all aquatic birds, considerably larger even than the swan. The pelican <em>(Pelecanus onocrotalus)<\/em> is generally about 50 inches (127 centimeters) long with a 16-inch (40.6-centimeters) beak, the upper part of which is hooked downward at the end, facilitating fish catching. The lower part of the bill supports a yellow pouch extending down the throat. The pouch may hold up to three gallons (11.4 liters) of food (small fish) and water. The pelican’s webbed feet are peculiar in having webs between all four toes. Pelicans are expert swimmers as well as efficient fliers. The pelican’s massive body, long neck, and comparatively small head give it proportions that make rising from the water difficult. To take off, a pelican must first flap awkwardly along the surface, pounding at the water with its legs.<\/p>\n<p>Pelicans fly and nest in groups. Both sexes care for the young that hatch from the one to four eggs. Whereas most birds feed their young by placing food into their mouths, the pelican reverses the process; the young pelican sticks its head and most of its body into its mother’s throat and plucks partially digested food from the mother’s crop. The deep penetration of the young’s beak into the mother’s gullet led ancients to believe that the young were feeding on the blood of the mother’s breast, thus giving rise to wide usage of the pelican as a symbol of Christ’s atonement, and of charity in general.<\/p>\n<p>The roseate pelican is white, at times with a faint rose tinge, and has black feathers growing from the wing joint farthest from the body. The legs, pouch, and skin around the eyes are yellow; the hook of the beak is red. This species may grow up to six feet (1.8 meters) long with a wingspread of up to eight feet (2.4 meters). During the breeding season, the coloration of the exposed areas of the roseate pelican’s legs and face changes from gray to bright orange or red. At the same time the white feathers acquire a beautiful pink tint originating from an oil-gland secretion. The oil is spread throughout the plumage by the bird as it preens.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars question whether “pelican” is an appropriate translation of the Hebrew in several verses, believing rather that the word refers to one of the owls, hawks, or vultures. Most translations include the pelican in the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17). Opinion on the other references is more sharply divided. Some scholars maintain that the desert context of the verses eliminates the possibility of a water bird like the pelican (cf. Ps 102:6, “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Is 34:11, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “hawk,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Zep 2:14, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>). On the other hand, the roseate pelican frequents the rivers, lakes, and marshes of the Holy Land. After flying out to sea as far as 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to swoop down on fish near the surface, the pelican often returns inland to a deserted place to digest its enormous meal. Thus, the pelican may be the lonely wilderness bird of those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PigeonorDove\">Pigeon or Dove<\/p>\n<p>Species of the pigeon family (Columbidae). In common usage the names “pigeon” and “dove” are virtually interchangeable. The common domestic pigeon familiar to city dwellers the world over, for example, is actually a descendant of the wild rock dove. Both names are used in English translations of the Bible to translate the same Hebrew word. A second Hebrew word is usually translated “turtledove.” Nevertheless, it seems clear that the ancient Hebrews recognized differences among dove species.<\/p>\n<p>At least six species of pigeon or dove reside in modern Israel: the rock, ring, and stock doves (genus <em>Columba<\/em>), and the turtle, collared, and palm doves (genus <em>Streptopelia<\/em>). Of the six, the rock dove <em>(Columba livia)<\/em> and the turtledove <em>(Streptopelia turtur)<\/em> seem to be the two most often referred to in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Pigeons vary in size from 6 to over 12 inches (15 to 30 centimeters). The most colorful Israeli species is the rock dove, which can be a beautiful silvery gray with grayish-green iridescent plumage on the wings (noted by David, Ps 68:13). The smaller doves <em>(Streptopelia)<\/em> are less colorful, mostly gray or buff with a blackish or checkered half collar on the back of the neck. Pigeons have short necks and small heads, plump bodies, and short wings controlled by strong muscles that enable them to fly considerable distances. The smaller doves have longer tails.<\/p>\n<p>At present, the wild rock dove is found primarily in the area around the Sea of Galilee and farther to the south in the many ravines leading down to the Dead Sea. Wild rock doves prefer to build their nests on rocks and cliff faces, a fact precisely described in Scripture (Sg 2:14; Jer 48:28). All Israeli doves build fragile nests of scraps of vegetation. Eggs are hatched twice a year. Doves seldom lay more than two eggs. The young are cared for in the nest by both parents, who rove over the fields eating seeds and weeds. The adult’s crop contains digested food in a milky condition, called pigeon’s milk, which can be regurgitated and fed to the young.<\/p>\n<p>During courtship there is a great deal of rivalry among the male doves. The turtledove’s courtship dance is an awesome aerial display. The attention to courtship, the joint care of young, and the solicitude of the parents for each other, noted from earliest times, have made the dove one of the most popular symbols of love and peace (Sg 1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major distinction between pigeons (ring doves) and turtledoves seems to have been recognized by ancient writers. Pigeons are year-round residents and easily tamed, whereas turtledoves are migratory. Turtledoves were confined in cages singly or in pairs as pets or for sacrifices. Pigeons were probably the first birds to be domesticated, perhaps as early as Noah’s time (Gn 8:8-12). They were depicted on the earliest Egyptian monuments, and their edibility was mentioned in early Egyptian texts. Before long, domestic pigeons were regarded as evidence of a household’s prosperity. In the more prosperous households they nested in dovecotes of molded pottery clay fashioned in latticelike structures (hence the “windows” of Is 60:8).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there were many dovecotes in the parks around Herod the Great’s palace in Jerusalem. The dove’s popularity was due not only to its docility but also to its desirability as food and as an acceptable and relatively inexpensive sacrifice. The turtledove may have been regarded more highly as a sacrifice because of its wildness and consequent lesser availability. The two biblical references to turtledoves not in a sacrificial context refer to their migratory habits and to their arrival in Israel in the spring (Sg 2:12; Jer 8:7; cf. Hos 11:11).<\/p>\n<p>Most of the references to doves and pigeons in the Bible are in statements about sacrificial procedures (Gn 15:7-10; Lv 1:14; 5:7; 12:6; Nm 6:10; Lk 2:24). Other references, however, include a range of observations and symbolic usages of the dove. Its throaty moaning was often observed (Is 38:14; 59:11; Ez 7:16; Na 2:7). Its power of flight was well known (Ps 55:6), as were its beauty (Sg 1:15; 4:1; 5:12), its gentleness and loyalty to its mate (Sg 2:14; 5:2; 6:9), its affection (Ps 74:19), and its innocence (Mt 10:16). The one negative reference to doves is in Hosea 7:11, where they are said to be senseless and foolish, perhaps in reference to their overly trusting nature.<\/p>\n<p>Of NT references, perhaps the most significant is the description of the Holy Spirit at Christ’s baptism as a descending dove (Mt 3:16). The dove’s loving nature made it natural for early Christians to connect the dove image with the concept of the Comforter. Since then the dove has remained the most popular symbol of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Quail\">Quail<\/p>\n<p>Short, stocky birds with bills and feet similar to those of chickens; hence they are adapted to eating seeds or insects. Quail <em>(Coturnix coturnix)<\/em> are the smallest of the subfamily of poultry that also includes pheasants and partridges. Quail (or “quails,” another plural form) are about ten inches (25.4 centimeters) long and have small, rounded wings. They burst from their hiding places in the grass or bushes with a whirring sound. The belly of the quail is white. Up to 18 eggs are laid, and if the mother dies, the male has been known to assume the care of the young. Quail of the Mediterranean region winter in the Sudan and migrate northward in vast flocks in the spring. Quail cannot maintain a long sustained flight but make use of wind currents to keep them aloft.<\/p>\n<p>Enormous flocks of quail twice served as food for the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai, when the birds were driven down in the desert miraculously by winds (Ex 16:13; Nm 11:31-32; Ps 105:40). The second time they were probably flying along the Gulf of Aqaba and were blown off course by the east wind (Nm 11:31; Ps 78:26-28). Their inability to sustain long flight may account for their low flying level—two cubits, or about 40 inches (101.6 centimeters). When exhausted, they were easily caught by hand (Nm 11:31-32). Quail were considered clean and the most delicate eating of all game birds, and they were preserved by drying in the sun.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Raven\">Raven<\/p>\n<p>Member of the crow family (Corvidae). The Hebrew word for “raven” means “black one.” The raven (<em>Corvus corax<\/em>) weighs about three pounds (1.36 kilograms) and varies from 22 to 26 inches (56 to 66 centimeters) in length. Its tail is broader in the middle than at either end. Eight species are found in Israel: three ravens, two jackdaws, one crow, one rook, and one chough. The crow, about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters) long, is smaller than a raven, and its tail is uniform in width. The raven’s most conspicuous feature is its glossy black iridescent plumage.<\/p>\n<p>Ravens and crows have survived in spite of the dislike many humans have for them. Excellent fliers, they migrate by day and congregate in great flocks of up to several hundred thousand. During the nesting season, they make nests of sticks in which two to seven eggs are laid. Ravens mate for life. Equipped with strong wings, a strong bill, and strong feet, ravens can live in isolated places from which they range widely for food. That it did not return to the ark was a good sign to Noah, indicating that the raven could find food and possibly a place to rest on dry mountaintops (Gn 8:7).<\/p>\n<p>The raven, essentially a scavenger, was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:15; Dt 14:14). Yet ravens fed Elijah at God’s command (1 Kgs 17:4-6). Job was told that God gave the raven its food (Jb 38:41), as the psalmist and Jesus repeated (Ps 147:9; Lk 12:24). The raven’s glistening black plumage inspired the bride’s comparison of her beloved’s hair (Sg 5:11). They prefer desolate, uninhabited areas as their home territory (Is 34:11). Ravens are crafty, active birds. Some are capable of speaking, solving puzzles, and performing feats of memory. Bold and curious, they sometimes use their talents for theft.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Seagull\">Seagull<\/p>\n<p>Robust seabirds, primarily scavengers (family Laridae). Several species of gulls live along the seacoast of the Holy Land. They are usually gray-backed with white heads and underparts and black wing tips. The slender bill ends in a downward curve.<\/p>\n<p>Seagulls may be 8 to 30 inches (20 to 76 centimeters) long. Many species migrate, traveling long distances with their superb flying ability. Gulls can also swim easily because of their webbed feet. Their voice is like a harsh scream or squawk. In nesting season many nest together in any available place, such as a cliff or tree. Both male and female incubate and care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>Because gulls will eat almost anything, they are listed as ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15, <span>asv<\/span> has “sea mew,” a common European gull). Some commentators believe that those passages refer to an owl or to the cuckoo and not to the seagull.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cuckoo (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Sparrow\">Sparrow<\/p>\n<p>Small bird of the finch family (Fringillidae) or the weaver finch family (Ploceidae), considered to be of little worth. The Hebrew word is a general term for “bird” and refers to any small bird such as a sparrow, finch, thrush, or starling. In translation, however, the word sometimes refers to the common English or house sparrow (<em>Passer domestica;<\/em> Ps 84:3; Prv 26:2).<\/p>\n<p>Dull in color with a black throat, the male house sparrow is a noisy and energetic creature. The nest, when built in open places, has an opening on the side and is made of almost anything available. Sparrows also nest in sheltered places, in dwellings, boxes, or holes in trees. They lay four to seven eggs.<\/p>\n<p>The common or house sparrow was known in ancient Greece and Egypt. There it had a reputation for invading fields in large swarms and picking the seeds from them. It is a permanent resident of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The sparrow is prolific and lives in close association with humans. It was considered ritually clean. Sparrows brought low prices in countries where they were sold (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). Today in Near Eastern marketplaces, boys offer live sparrows for sale. Tied together in groups of four to six by strings attached to one leg, the birds fly about over the boys’ heads. Evidently such a sight was common in NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Stork\">Stork<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged, white wading bird (genus <em>Ciconia<\/em>) having large, powerful wings with glossy black primary and secondary feathers. The flapping of its wings produces a loud rushing sound. Connecting membranes between the toes prevent the bird from sinking into the mud. Its red bill is sharp and long, serving to seize and lift its prey out of the water. Storks are mute, lacking a voice box.<\/p>\n<p>Flocks of storks pass through the Holy Land during their September migration on the way to central and southern Africa and likewise in the spring on their return flight to their homes in northern Israel, Syria, and Europe. Storks travel in vast flocks during the day, spreading out against the sky.<\/p>\n<p>The stork’s faithful tending of the young is proverbial, as is its habit of returning annually to the same nesting place. Storks have the habit of adding to their nests each year, and it is possible to find nests that are 100 years old and have a height of more than three feet (.9 meter).<\/p>\n<p>Two species of storks frequent the Holy Land. The white stork <em>(Ciconia alba)<\/em> is 40 inches (101.6 centimeters) tall, and its wingspread is six feet (1.8 meters), enabling it to move with a slow, sustained flight or to soar. In folklore the white stork is sometimes considered to be a harbinger of good fortune.<\/p>\n<p>The black stork <em>(Ciconia nigra),<\/em> common around the Dead Sea valley, nests in trees; hence it may be the tree-dwelling species referred to in Psalm 104:17. The Hebrew name for “stork” means literally the “kingly one,” or the “loyal one,” a reference to the care of the bird for its young. Like the heron, the stork was ceremonially unclean because of its diet of aquatic organisms, refuse, small animals, birds, and reptiles (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Jeremiah mentioned the stork’s uncanny and instinctive knowledge of the time of its migration (Jer 8:7). Its impressive wings figured in one of Zechariah’s visions (Zec 5:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swallow\">Swallow<\/p>\n<p>Small, nearly black, forked-tailed bird with long, tapering wings, noted for its graceful flight <em>(hirundo rustica).<\/em> The small, weak feet are poorly adapted for walking. Swallows resemble swifts in shape and life habits but are somewhat smaller.<\/p>\n<p>The swallow’s large mouth enables it to catch insects while in flight. Colors vary from brown and blue to white. Swallows often nest in buildings, a feature noticed by the psalmist, who reported a swallow’s home at the temple (Ps 84:3).<\/p>\n<p>Swallows are basically resident in Israel, whereas the swift is a migratory bird noted for the regularity of its migratory schedule. The “swallow” of Isaiah 38:14 probably refers to a swift, as does Jeremiah 8:7, where the dependability of the bird is contrasted with the irregularity of God’s people. Proverbs 26:2 may be a reference to either the swallow or the swift.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swift (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swan\">Swan<\/p>\n<p>Large, graceful water birds. Two species of swan (genus <em>Cygnus<\/em>) are found in the Middle East as passing migrants <em>(Cygnus olor<\/em> and <em>Cygnus musicus).<\/em> Swans are known as the best musicians among the birds and were considered sacred to the god Apollo by the Greeks. Their voices sound like flutes and harps.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Leviticus 11:18 and Deuteronomy 14:16 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably not to the swan but to the water hen or the barn owl, since there seems little reason to declare the vegetarian swan an unclean animal. <em>See also<\/em> Owl, Barn or White (above); Water Hen (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swift\">Swift<\/p>\n<p>Small, strong flyers (genus <em>Apus<\/em>). Like the swallow, the swift has long, bent wings and a cleft tail, enabling it to obtain great speed as it skims the ground and sweeps through the air. A swift devours a great many harmful insects, catching them in its mouth in flight. Many swifts make their nests in rooftops and in nooks and crannies of city walls. Their nests are built with strong feathers cemented together with saliva. Other swifts live in caves and clefts of rocks.<\/p>\n<p>Common swifts are native to Israel, and in the Jordan Valley they occur in large flocks. Isaiah 38:14 (<span>niv<\/span>) seems to be clear reference to the swift’s plaintive call, since the swallow’s sharp chirp is not a striking simile for a distraught king’s cry. The swift has a soft, delicate voice, and its cry could be easily interpreted as melodious wailing.<\/p>\n<p>The migratory swifts arrive on a precise schedule in the Holy Land in late winter, and immense flocks fill the cities with their cries. Thus the reference in Jeremiah 8:7 to swallows, which are largely permanent residents, is probably to swifts.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swallow (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Vulture\">Vulture<\/p>\n<p>Subfamily (Aegypiinae) of the hawk family (Accipitridae). Each of the four species of Old World vultures is found in the Holy Land: the Egyptian, griffon, black, and bearded vulture (the bearded vulture is also known as the lammergeier). These birds range in size from the 24-inch (61-centimeters) Egyptian vulture to the huge bearded vulture, largest of all flying birds in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Most vultures are brown or black, having a short neck and a short, hooked bill with which they tear the dead animal flesh of which they are fond. All vultures, except the bearded, have bare or down-covered heads and necks, enabling these scavengers to penetrate deep into a carcass without spoiling the plumage. Excellent eyesight enables a vulture to locate a carcass from a lofty soaring position. Considering the decayed condition of most of its food, a vulture’s poor sense of smell may be a fortunate limitation. Vultures nest in any convenient place; both parents care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word usually translated “eagle” in the OT may have been a general term for all large birds of prey, including vultures. Thus many of the passages about eagles may refer to either the eagle or the vulture (cf. Lv 11:13; Dt 14:12, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). Such passages include references to nesting habits (Jb 39:27-28; Jer 49:16; Ob 1:4), care for fledglings (Dt 32:11), powers of flight (Ex 19:4; Dt 28:49; Jb 9:26; Lam 4:19), and extremely high soaring altitude (Prv 23:5; 30:19; Is 40:31). Despite variations among translations, the vulture clearly belongs in the list of unclean birds because of its foul diet (Lv 11:13, 18; Dt 14:12, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Several references to the eagle in the <span>kjv<\/span> have been changed to “vulture” in modern translations. The change seems appropriate in the references to the vulture as a sign of present or impending doom (Lam 4:19; Hos 8:1). Likewise the eye-plucking bird of Proverbs 30:17 is probably a vulture. The phrase “bald as the eagle” (Mi 1:16) clearly should read “bald as the vulture,” since there are no bald eagles in Israel and most vultures are bald. Since the vulture, like the eagle, was a symbol of sovereignty and domination in the ancient Near East, some gods were represented as vultures. Thus Ezekiel’s comparison of the kings of Babylon and Egypt to eagles may be conceived alternatively as comparisons to vultures (Ez 17:3, 7). Jesus’ reference to the eagles congregating around corpses at the end times (Mt 24:28) should also be revised to vultures, since eagles are usually solitary eaters, whereas vultures generally flock together around carrion.<\/p>\n<p>Several <span>kjv<\/span> references to vultures are usually translated “kite” or “falcon” in modern translations (cf. various versions of Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13; Jb 28:7; Is 34:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Kestrel; Kite; Lammergeier; Vulture, Black, or Osprey; Vulture, Egyptian; Vulture, Griffon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureBlackorOsprey\">Vulture, Black, or Osprey<\/p>\n<p>Diurnal flesh eater, a little over three feet (.9 meter) long with a wingspread of over three yards (2.7 meters). The feathers of the black or osprey vulture (<em>Aegypius monachus<\/em>) are black and the head and upper part of the neck are bald like those of other carrion eaters. It nests in the Jordan River valley and seems to have been abundant in biblical times. Today it is quite rare. The black vulture is probably the osprey of Leviticus 11:13 and Deuteronomy 14:12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureEgyptian\">Vulture, Egyptian<\/p>\n<p>Also known as the gier eagle or as pharaoh’s hen. The plumage of the Egyptian vulture (<em>Neophron percnopterus<\/em>) is basically white with a naked head and yellow neck. The Egyptian vulture breaks bones left by other vultures. Its flight is slow and easy, and its voice is a croak. Measuring about 24 inches (61 centimeters) in length, it is the smallest of all the carrion-eating birds found in the Holy Land. It may be referred to in the list of unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17, “gier eagle,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “carrion vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureGriffon\">Vulture, Griffon<\/p>\n<p>One of the largest flying birds in the Holy Land <em>(Gyps fulvus).<\/em> Until a generation ago, the griffon vulture was one of the most common birds in the Holy Land. Today it is on the verge of extinction. Many have been killed by eating poisonous bait meant for foxes and jackals. In addition, its reproduction is limited; the female lays only one or two eggs a year.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture measures about four feet (121.9 centimeters) in length and up to ten feet (3 meters) between wing tips. Its beak is extremely strong, and its short toes are fitted with blunt talons. It is a light-brown bird with a pale yellow head and neck that are almost bare, being covered only with a very fine down.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture feeds mostly on carrion, but also on locusts and small tortoises. It is able to go without food for several days with no ill effects, but when it does break its fast, it gorges itself. It is found especially in the region of the Sea of Galilee. Most biblical references to the vulture are likely to be to the griffon vulture.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"WaterHen\">Water Hen<\/p>\n<p>Small water bird of the rail family. The water hen listed among unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:16, <span>rsv<\/span> only) may be the biblical bird most difficult to identify. Several alternatives have been suggested, including the swan (<span>kjv<\/span>), one of the owls (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>), or the marsh hen (<span>tlb<\/span>). Most scholars rule out the swan, since it is a vegetarian bird and thus should not be considered unclean. An owl remains a possibility.<\/p>\n<p>The marsh hen is a rail, several species of which inhabit Israel. One of those species is the purple gallinule <em>(Porphyrio porphyrio).<\/em> Rails are very thin birds varying from 6 to 20 inches (15 to 51 centimeters) in length. They live in marshes, where they eat a great variety of animal and vegetable matter, thus making them a candidate for inclusion in the Mosaic lists of unclean animals.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIRDS<\/h3>\n\n<p>Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult or impossible. The biblical languages were not highly specialized scientific languages. People in biblical times generally knew the difference between similar animals now categorized as separate species. For birds, however, they frequently used poetic, descriptive terms. Biblical scholars attempt to overcome the difficulties in identification by comparing the Hebrew words with similar words in related languages and by attention to the habitat, habits, and characteristics attributed to the birds in Scripture. Nevertheless, different scholars sometimes arrive at different identifications.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalReferencestoBirds\">Biblical References to Birds<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to birds both in literal and figurative senses. The biblical writers were keen observers of nature, their awareness of birds and bird life being reflected in many passages. They asserted that God knows all the birds (Ps 50:11) and cares for them (Mt 10:29). They saw God’s covenant with Noah after the flood, his promise never to destroy life again by flood, as extending even to the birds and animals (Gn 9:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law declared many birds “unclean,” mostly species that were scavengers or predators, or inhabited waste places. Centuries later the early Christians came to regard unclean species as clean by God’s decree, revealed in the apostle Peter’s vision (Acts 10:12). Other birds, like quail, sustained the Israelites in their wanderings (Ex 16:13). The Law prescribed birds as sacrifices for a firstborn child (Lk 2:24), for a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10), for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:22), and as a burnt offering and sin offering (12:8).<\/p>\n<p>Birds are easily subject to extinction, especially through human activity. God required the Israelites to practice conservation to prevent any birds from becoming extinct in the Holy Land, both for the birds’ sake and so the Israelites would have a continuous source of food. The Law allowed foraging Israelites to take eggs or the young from a bird’s nest, but they were not permitted to kill both a mother bird and her young (Dt 22:6).<\/p>\n<p>Biblical writers turned to nature frequently for illustrations of divine principles or human characteristics. Comparisons of humans to birds sometimes carry a sense of lowness, as when King Nebuchadnezzar developed claws like a bird in his madness (Dn 4:33), or when Job remarked that birds did not know the source of wisdom (Jb 28:21). In Jesus’ parable of the sower, the birds that ate the seed scattered by the wayside may represent indifference and a lack of spiritual understanding (Mt 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture also contains sympathetic images of the plight of birds. A lonely man praying was likened to a lonely bird on a housetop (Ps 102:7). If someone was unjustly hunted by his enemies, he would understand a hunted bird’s plight (Lam 3:52). Birds were said to be affected by curses on evildoers as they fled from Jerusalem or from the face of the earth (Jer 9:10; Zep 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of such misfortune visited upon birds, Scripture affirms that, like other creatures, they are cared for and delighted in by God (Ps 50:11; Mt 6:26; 10:29). Both Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar were compared to a tree that gives shelter to the birds (Ez 31:6; Dn 4:12; cf. 2:38). Human power, however, fails eventually as when the tree representing Nebuchadnezzar was cut down, forcing the birds to flee (Dn 4:14). God’s protection, by contrast, is unfailing. Jesus likened the kingdom of God to a mustard seed, growing to become a shelter for birds (Mt 13:32). God provides a habitation for birds (Ps 104:12), although Jesus, the Son of Man, had nowhere to rest his head (Mt 8:20).<\/p>\n<p>Birds were considered evidence of God’s handiwork (Jb 12:7). Bird lore provided examples of good sense in learning from a mistake (Prv 1:17; 6:5) and of bad judgment in failing to avoid the snares of immorality (7:23). Birds and other creatures could be tamed, unlike the wicked human tongue (Jas 3:7). Birds flying without alighting were an image of an undeserved curse (Prv 26:2). Without trust in God, people might be forced by evil to flee like a bird to the mountains (Ps 11:1). Birdsong was said to bring joy (Sg 2:12). The return of God’s people to the Promised Land would be like birds returning (Hos 11:11). Jesus expressed his love for Jerusalem by saying that he longed to gather his people to himself as a hen gathers her brood under her wing (Mt 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, birds were occasionally regarded as ominous signs. For example, Pharaoh’s baker learned of impending death because in a dream birds ate the food from a basket on his head (Gn 40:17). Solomon warned against cursing the king, even in private, because “a little bird may tell them what you said” (Eccl 10:20). A vivid biblical image is that of scavenging, carrion-eating birds consuming the bodies of evildoers. To the Israelites, such a desecration of humanity was an image of ultimate horror (Dt 28:26; 1 Sm 17:44; Is 46:11; Jer 7:33; 12:9; Ez 29:5; 39:4; Rv 19:17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IndividualSpecies\">Individual Species<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Bittern\">Bittern<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged wading bird <em>(Botaurus stellaris)<\/em> similar to the heron, but with shorter legs and a smaller, more compact body. Bitterns inhabit marshes, where it is easy for them to hide with their natural camouflage. A bittern’s mottled plumage of barred brown and black so duplicates the color and shape of swamp vegetation that at times the bird seems to disappear before the observer’s eyes. The neck is covered with long, soft feathers, making it appear disproportionately heavy. Bitterns are wary and solitary. During mating season the bittern’s larynx is modified to produce a mysterious-sounding cry. The body twists in an unusual manner in harmony with the notes. Bitterns nest alone in grassy marshes. Because they are shy, they have become symbols of places of desolation and loneliness.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the bittern is actually mentioned in the Bible. The <span>kjv<\/span> has “bittern” in three places (Is 14:23; 34:11; Zep 2:14). Many biblical scholars believe the Hebrew word in those verses refers not to the bittern but to the hedgehog (Is 14:23; Zep 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>) or porcupine (Is 34:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). The Hebrew word is similar to an Arabic word meaning “porcupine.” Other scholars point out that the references suggest a bird rather than a mammal, especially Zephaniah 2:14, which speaks of the creature making its “lodge in her capitals” (i.e., above Nineveh’s doorposts). Bitterns are particularly abundant in the swamps of the Tigris River (near Nineveh). The bittern’s characteristics may fit the references in the three passages better than do the hedgehog’s.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hedgehog; Animals (Porcupine).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Buzzard\">Buzzard<\/p>\n<p>Hawklike soaring bird <em>(Buteo vulgaris<\/em> or <em>Buteo ferox).<\/em> It resembles the kite, though its tail is straight and not cleft. It is mentioned in the list of unclean birds (Dt 14:13). But other translations render the word as “glede” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “kite” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). The parallel list in Leviticus 11, however, substitutes “kite” (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or “vulture” (<span>kjv<\/span>) for “buzzard.” Thus, it is difficult to determine whether the buzzard is actually mentioned in the Bible, even though it is a common resident of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Like other great soaring birds, the buzzard is noted for its sharp eyesight, and may be the bird mentioned for that quality in Job 28:7 (variously translated “falcon,” “eagle,” or “vulture”). It will trail its prey for hours, and has a remarkable ability to see a carcass on which it descends to feed. Somewhat larger than the common buzzard is the long-legged buzzard, found in Israel, western Asia, and Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kestrel; Kite; Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cormorant\">Cormorant<\/p>\n<p>Large, black gooselike bird <em>(Phalacrocorax carbo),<\/em> repeatedly depicted in art from Egypt and the Holy Land. Its length varies from 19 to 40 inches (48.3 to 101.6 centimeters). Its feet have webs between all four toes. The feet, attached far back on the body, serve as propellers when the cormorant dives to catch its meal of fish, crustacea, or amphibia. The long bill is curved at the tip, and under the bill is a sac in which the cormorant keeps the captured fish.<\/p>\n<p>Cormorants live in large companies, making nests of sticks and other vegetation that they carry to trees or to rocky shelves near coasts. Up to four eggs are incubated, and the young are fed by both parents.<\/p>\n<p>The cormorant frequents swamps around the Sea of Galilee, Lake Huleh (the waters of Merom), and the Mediterranean coast. Its Hebrew name originally denoted the “hurling down” of the bird at its prey. Cormorants dive into deep water and sometimes seem to zoom beneath the surface in their hunt for fish. The cormorant’s greed is proverbial. It was ceremonially unclean for the Israelites (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Pelican (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Crane\">Crane<\/p>\n<p>Tall wading birds <em>(Grus grus)<\/em> resembling storks and herons but with shorter talons. The plumage has a silvery gloss and the tail feathers are wavy. Large flocks of cranes flying in wedge-shaped formations pass over the Holy Land during the daylight hours each fall on their way to Africa from the northern countries of Europe and again in the spring when they return north to breed. Migratory flocks may number as many as 2,000 birds. Jeremiah 8:7 refers to the crane’s migratory habits.<\/p>\n<p>The usual call of the crane is best described as a bellow, but during migratory flight they emit a chattering sound that may be referred to in Isaiah 38:14. Cranes have remarkably powerful voices, their calls seeming to carry for miles. Migrating flocks usually have a flock leader who does the calling.<\/p>\n<p>A crane’s height may reach 40 to 60 inches (101.6 to 152.4 centimeters). Except for the ostrich, the crane is the tallest bird ever to inhabit the Holy Land. A crane’s wingspread may exceed 90 inches (228.6 centimeters). The overall color is steel gray; the head and neck are black with a longitudinal white stripe. The crane feeds on land rather than in shallow water. It feeds primarily on grass and grain yet may devour insects, snakes, small alligators, frogs, and worms, using its long, powerful bill as a sharp hammer for killing such creatures.<\/p>\n<p>The crane usually nests in solitary places, often in shallow water or nearby. Its nest is a mass of vegetation, holding two or three eggs that are light-colored with darker spots.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Cuckoo\">Cuckoo<\/p>\n<p>Small, drab brown bird known for its parasitic habits. The term the <span>kjv<\/span> used in Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15 may refer either to the common cuckoo <em>(Cuculus canorus)<\/em> or to the great spotted cuckoo <em>(Clamator glandarius).<\/em> The bird acts as a brood parasite, laying its eggs in the nest of another species after pushing out one of the eggs of the host species. The young cuckoo hatches before the young of the host species and evicts the other young. The foster parents raise it as their own.<\/p>\n<p>The cuckoo, an insect eater, is considered ritually unclean in Scripture, which might imply that it is a predator or carrion-eater. For that reason some believe the Hebrew word actually refers to the seagull or sea mew rather than the cuckoo. Gulls, terns, and petrels are all common on the seashore and lakes of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars believe that the Hebrew word refers not to the cuckoo but to one of the owls, possibly the long-eared owl.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Seagull (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Eagle\">Eagle<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey, genus <em>Aquila.<\/em> Vultures were often confused with eagles, making identification of the biblical birds difficult. Eagles’ heads are not bald as are the heads of vultures, but from a distance they appear similar. It is possible that the Hebrew word translated “eagle” (which literally means “to tear with the beak”) may have referred to all large birds of prey, eagles and vultures alike. A number of references to the eagle in Scripture are actually references to the griffon vulture (e.g., Hos 8:1; perhaps Mt 24:28). In certain passages, however, the true eagle may be meant.<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Land has several varieties of eagle, including the imperial eagle <em>(Aquila heliaca)<\/em> and the less common golden eagle <em>(Aquila chrysaetos).<\/em> These birds are powerfully built with strong wings; their movements reveal suppleness and strength. A distinctive hooked beak, which enhances the eagle’s dignified and somewhat ferocious appearance, provides it with an effective instrument for tearing and killing prey. Short, powerful legs and prehensile claws enable an eagle to apply an almost unbreakable grip on a struggling victim. The strong talons have sharp points and edges. The eagle hunts by day.<\/p>\n<p>For Jeremiah and other prophets, the eagle was the epitome of swiftness. The golden eagle, which can fly three or four miles (5–7 kilometers) in ten minutes, may have evoked the comparisons in 2 Samuel 1:23;Jeremiah 4:13; 49:22; Lamentations 4:19 (<span>kjv<\/span>), and Habakkuk 1:8. Moses used a similar comparison to emphasize the sudden striking power of a hostile enemy (Dt 28:49). The author of Proverbs, observing the high altitude to which the eagle soars, applied that image to the human situation (Prv 23:4-5; cf. Rv 12:14).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle’s strength and invincibility were mentioned often with reference to powerful nations attacking Israel. The prophet Ezekiel described Nebuchadnezzar as an eagle (Ez 17:3). Both the Babylonians and Assyrians frequently depicted the eagle in their art, especially as a deity with a man’s body and an eagle’s head. Nebuchadnezzar even had an experience of temporary insanity in which “his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws” (Dn 4:33, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eagle builds its nest on inaccessible mountain peaks or at the top of the tallest trees, a fact noted by Jeremiah (Jer 49:16; cf. Jb 39:27-28; Ob 1:4). The brood consists of two or occasionally three eggs. Only the female sits on the nest, but the young eaglets are fed by both parents. Eagles are devoted to their offspring and train them with great care in the art of flying. Some commentators interpret Exodus 19:4 and Deuteronomy 32:11 as evidence of the eagle’s practice of catching its young on its wings. There is virtually no evidence from observation, however, that any eagle can perform such a feat. In some versions the wording avoids a direct statement that eagles bear their young on their wings.<\/p>\n<p>Some eagles in captivity have lived to an age of over 100 years. This remarkable longevity caused the psalmist to speak of the eagle whose youth is renewed (Ps 103:5). Confronted by its impressive qualities, biblical authors observed the eagle with awe and wonder (Jb 39:27-30; Prv 30:18-19). Those awesome qualities also contributed to several prophetic visions, including Ezekiel’s vision of a creature with an eagle’s face (Ez 1:10) and the apostle John’s vision of a holy beast like a flying eagle (Rv 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"FowlDomestic\">Fowl, Domestic<\/p>\n<p>Domesticated poultry <em>(Gallus gallus domesticus),<\/em> probably derived from the red jungle fowl of India. They seem to have been known already in OT times (Prv 30:31). A seal of Jaazaniah (see 2 Kgs 25:23), dating from about 600 <span>BC<\/span>, bears the image of a fighting cock. A reference to fowls or poultry for Nehemiah’s table, however, may be to wild game rather than domestic fowl (Neh 5:18).<\/p>\n<p>Poultry symbolized fertility, and the Jews carried a cock and hen in front of bridal couples at weddings. The motherly concern of hens gathering their broods was familiar to Jesus’ hearers (Mt 23:37; Lk 13:34).<\/p>\n<p>Since roosters habitually crow an hour or two before dawn, the third watch of the night, from midnight to 3:00 <span>am<\/span>, was known as the cockcrow. According to the Talmud (a commentary on Jewish law), keeping chickens was prohibited in Jerusalem in NT times to prevent the insects and larvae that breed in chicken droppings from contaminating sacrificial flesh. For that reason the cock that Peter heard (Mt 26:34, 74; Lk 22:34, 60-61) probably belonged to Romans living there or to Jews who did not follow Jewish regulations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GoatsuckerorNightHawk\">Goatsucker or Night Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Migratory bird, dark in color and short-legged, similar to the American whippoorwill. The goatsucker (genus <em>Caprimulgus<\/em>) resembles an owl with a flat head, large eyes, soft plumage, and a noiseless flight. It hunts insects at night, catches them on the wing, and during the day rests on branches. Goatsuckers were so named because they were thought by the ancients to milk goats. According to Leviticus 11:16 and Deuteronomy 14:15, they were ritually unclean. Although some scholars believe that an owl is intended, there seems to be good reason to accept the “night hawk” translation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Goose\">Goose<\/p>\n<p>Long-necked, web-footed water birds with waterproof feathers (genus <em>Anser<\/em>). Domestic geese were known to the Greeks of Homer’s day, since they are mentioned in the <em>Odyssey.<\/em> They were domesticated in Egypt perhaps as early as the Old Kingdom (c. 2500 <span>BC<\/span>) and certainly by the time of the New Kingdom (c. 1500– 1100 <span>BC<\/span>). They were used for food and sacrifice. The breeding of geese was widespread in Canaan in biblical times; ivory carvings of the 13th or 12th century <span>BC<\/span> showing geese have been found in excavations at Megiddo in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Many species of geese spend most of their lives on land even though they are waterfowl; some even build their nests in trees. Wild geese tend to inhabit flatlands and prairies rather than mountainous terrain.<\/p>\n<p>Geese may have graced the table of King Solomon. In 1 Kings 4:23 they are referred to as “fatted fowl,” a term that may also refer to ducks, swans, guineas, pigeons, or other domestic edible birds.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hawk\">Hawk<\/p>\n<p>Small birds of prey found in the Holy Land. Most references are probably to the sparrow hawk <em>(Accipter nisus).<\/em> This bird is slightly larger than the kestrel, has a grayish-brown back and a white belly with black and brown bars. It has short feathers, long, curved talons, and broad wings, rounded at the outer ends, which enable it to soar on updrafts. The long tail, acting as a rudder, helps the bird change its course swiftly in flight. It is hence very maneuverable in the air when chasing warblers or other small birds. It does not seize its prey on the ground, as does the kestrel, but hunts and attacks small birds in flight. Hawks hunt in the daytime, unlike owls that are adapted for nighttime hunting. With their eyes located on the side of the head, hawks are very keen-sighted. They usually nest in tall trees and their nests are often occupied by the same pair year after year.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians embalmed sparrow hawks and regarded all hawks highly. The god Horus was depicted with the head of a hawk hawk was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). It was not a permanent resident of Israel but stopped off as it migrated from north to south. Its southward migration is mentioned in Job 39:26. A reference in Isaiah 34:11 to “hawk” (“cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>) is uncertain. <em>See<\/em> Kestrel or Falcon; Kite (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Heron\">Heron<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (genus <em>Ardea<\/em>) with a long, thin neck and long legs. It has a characteristic comblike growth on the inner side of the third toe.<\/p>\n<p>Herons are generally white, blue, green, or gray. They nest together in rookeries, and both parents bring in food for the young. Herons feed on fish, small reptiles, and insects, gulping them down in one swallow. Adults and young migrate in the late fall to warm southern climates. The white heron attains a length of more than 3 feet (.9 meter), whereas the dwarf heron is only about 22 inches (55.9 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>At least seven varieties of heron are reported in the Holy Land. The white ibis, or buff-backed heron (<em>Buphus russatus<\/em>), was probably the most common species. The purple heron <em>(Ardea purpureus)<\/em> is a summer breeder found in all parts of the Holy Land where there is standing water.<\/p>\n<p>The blue-gray heron (<em>Ardea cinerea<\/em>) winters in southern Europe and North Africa, migrating to northern Europe in the early spring. In Israel it builds its winter nest near water, in swamps and along riverbanks, where it feeds on fish and frogs. It will stand patiently in the water for hours, and then suddenly its long, pointed beak darts down with lightning speed to catch its prey. Often the blue-gray heron builds its nest in a tall tree to which it may return year after year.<\/p>\n<p>According to Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18, the heron was ceremonially unclean to the Israelites. Some scholars believe those references are to the cormorant, but most scholars think they refer to one of the herons.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cormorant (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Hoopoe\">Hoopoe<\/p>\n<p>One of the Holy Land’s most beautiful birds (<em>Upupa epops<\/em>). It has vividly colored plumage, a lovely crown-shaped crest that becomes erect when the bird is alarmed, and a long, slender curved bill. The pinkish-brown hoopoe is about 11 inches (27.9 centimeters) long, with black and white bands on its back, tail, and wings. Hoopoes are basically desert-dwelling birds.<\/p>\n<p>The name “hoopoe” is derived from the sound of the bird’s call. To emit the sound, the neck feathers are puffed up and the head snapped in the air. When on the ground, the bird hammers its beak into the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The hoopoe arrives in the Holy Land in February, breeds in the summer, and leaves in September. It was held in religious reverence by the Egyptians. It was listed as ritually unclean (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18), probably because it searches for grubs and small insects in such unsanitary places as dunghills.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ibis\">Ibis<\/p>\n<p>Wading bird (<em>Threskiornis aethiopica<\/em>) presently unknown in the Holy Land but possibly known there in biblical times. It was well known in ancient Egypt, where it was sacred to the god Thoth. Today it has practically vanished with the disappearance of swamps along the Nile.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the ibis is meant in Leviticus 11:17, where it is classified as ceremonially unclean. The same Hebrew word in Deuteronomy 14:16 and Isaiah 34:11 is translated “great owl,” a translation preferred by most scholars.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl, Great (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KestrelorFalcon\">Kestrel or Falcon<\/p>\n<p>Small hawk (<em>Falco tinnunculus<\/em>) about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long with brown, black, and yellow feathers on its breast. It was abundant in the Holy Land in villages and in the countryside, nesting on rooftops and among rocks. Like most hawks, the kestrel is able to hover and float in midair and then swoop down on its prey, seizing it with sharp, hooklike talons. It feeds largely on mice, small reptiles, and insects.<\/p>\n<p>Embalmed kestrels have been found in ancient Egyptian tombs. The Egyptians also embalmed the hunting kestrel <em>(Falco cherug),<\/em> which can be tamed and trained to hunt rabbits and other small game. Falconry (hunting with hawks of various species) was well known among the ancients and is still practiced today. That the Assyrians were familiar with falconry is seen in the records of Ashurbanipal. Because the kestrel is a predator, it was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:14). Some translations render the word as “kite” (Lv 11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>; Dt 14:13, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>), an illustration of the difficulty of identifying biblical birds precisely.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kite or Glede (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"KiteorGlede\">Kite or Glede<\/p>\n<p>Large bird of prey <em>(Milvus milvus).<\/em> The average length of the kite is about 19 inches (48.3 centimeters). The upper part is generally dark, but the belly is white. Kites nest high in trees and build nests of vegetation, including sticks. They rarely have more than two or three young, which they feed on snakes, grasshoppers, and so on. Sometimes kites are called snake hawks.<\/p>\n<p>The kite is a migratory bird that stays in Israel during the summer, especially in the mountains of southern Judea, in the trackless wastes west of the Dead Sea, and in the wilderness of Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The red kite or glede is a medium-sized bird of prey. The edges of the upper part of the bill overlap with the lower one, forming sharp scissors. The tail is forked or cleft like that of a fish. Its loud cry often includes sharp whistling notes. Other Holy Land species include the black kite <em>(Milvus migrans)<\/em> and the black-winged kite <em>(Elanus caeruleus).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The kite is listed among the unclean birds in Mosaic law (Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13), but the precise identification of the birds mentioned there is disputed by some scholars and translators.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Buzzard; Kestrel or Falcon (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Lammergeier\">Lammergeier<\/p>\n<p>Largest of the vultures and less common than the other members of the family. It is grayish brown with white streaks and has a black tuft of stiff hairs in the facial area that gives it the name “bearded vulture.” Another name for it is “lamb vulture.”<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier <em>(Gypaetus barbatus)<\/em> has a unique way of killing its prey; since its beak is not particularly powerful it carries its victim high in the air and then drops it on rocks.<\/p>\n<p>The lammergeier is especially partial to tortoises and to marrow bone. After jackals and smaller vultures have reduced a carcass to bone, the lammergeier crushes the bones to obtain the marrow, or swallows the pieces intact. Hence it is also known as the ossifrage, from a Latin word meaning “bone crusher.” The lammergeier was unclean in Mosaic law (Lv 11:13; Dt 14:13; both translated “vulture” in <span>nlt<\/span> and “ossifrage” in <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Ostrich\">Ostrich<\/p>\n<p>Two-toed, swift-running, flightless bird (<em>Struthio camelus<\/em>) that lives in deserts or in areas covered with stunted bushes.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times ostriches ranged as far north as Syria and were found over the entire wasteland of the Negev Desert, but they have since become extinct there. Its Hebrew name means “daughter of the desert.” It is the largest of all living birds, attaining a height of about 10 feet (3 meters) and a weight of 175 pounds (79.5 kilograms), though some males may weigh as much as 300 pounds (136.4 kilograms). The female is considerably smaller. Powerful thighs and long legs give the ostrich great speed, reported to be as high as 40 <span>mph<\/span> (64 <span>kph<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ostrich is omnivorous. It eats grass, fruits, small mammals, birds, snakes, and lizards, as well as large pebbles that assist in the breakdown of food in its gizzard. The ostrich is hunted, but its eggs are generally more sought after than the bird itself. The empty shells are traded throughout the Mediterranean area for use as utensils, or when broken up as raw material for beads. The eggs—as many as 25 in one clutch—are laid in a shallow nest of sand, with some left uncovered. They may appear to be neglected by day, but only because they are ordinarily incubated at night. The cock does most of the incubating; the female participates only during cold days. The strong, thick eggshell protects the embryo from the heat of the desert.<\/p>\n<p>Occasionally the ostrich is used for riding or even for pulling small carts. Ostrich feathers are in great demand. Ostrich plumes graced ancient royal courts as fans. An ivory-handled fan of Pharaoh Tutankhamen (King Tut) had lovely ostrich plumes. The plumes are white in the male and brownish gray in the female. The reputation of the ostrich for stupidity comes from its behavior when hunted and cornered; it fails to take evasive action even when doing so would save it. In open country, however, it is very wary and runs at great speed to escape. In contrast to the partridge, an ostrich will run away from its eggs and chicks when pursued.<\/p>\n<p>Most biblical references to ostriches emphasize their negative characteristics. They were regarded as unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15). Several references associate ostriches with images of wilderness and desolation (Jb 30:29; Is 13:21; 34:13; 43:20; Jer 50:39). Their night cry, which has been compared to an ox’s lowing in pain, is referred to in Micah 1:8. Biblical writers also noted the apparent indifference of the ostrich to its brood (Jb 39:13-18; Lam 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Owl\">Owl<\/p>\n<p>Nocturnal birds (order Strigiformes) with large heads and large, forward-looking eyes. Their wing and tail feathers are soft as velvet, helping to make their flight noiseless. The owl’s body is small and slender, about the size of a pigeon, but it appears bulky because of the thick covering of feathers. Owls have been considered bearers of misfortune and omens of disaster. In the Near East, owls now live in temple ruins and pyramids in Egypt, and in rock-hewn graves, ruins, and caves on both sides of the Jordan River in Israel. They seldom come near inhabited dwellings.<\/p>\n<p>Owls have excellent night vision, which they use to capture rodents or other animals. Although unusually large, the owl’s eyes are almost useless in the daylight because the light dazzles them. The owl is able to swallow its prey whole because of its elastic esophagus. Indigestible hair and bones are regurgitated as pellets. The bill is short but sharply hooked.<\/p>\n<p>Owls may lay up to ten eggs. The young are cared for on the nest by both parents. Both adults and young tend to remain in the area in which they were hatched. Eight species of owls are found in the Holy Land, of which five are plentiful. It is difficult, however, to identify a particular species with any of the four Hebrew words translated “owl” in Scripture. A fifth word translated “owl” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is more appropriately identified with the ostrich (<span>rsv<\/span>). Owls appear in the lists of unclean birds (Lv 11:17; Dt 14:16), and although translations differ, they concur that all species of owls, being predators, are unclean.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ostrich (above); Owl, Barn or White; Owl, Great; Owl, Little; Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlBarnorWhite\">Owl, Barn or White<\/p>\n<p>Large owl <em>(Tyto alloa)<\/em> with a distinct heart-shaped face. It may get its Hebrew name from a snoring sound it makes when breathing in the nest. In flight it emits a frightening screech, and thus is sometimes referred to as the screech owl. Its somewhat sinister features—a large head and wide pop eyes—have led some people to consider it demonic, but they have also inspired another name, the monkey-faced owl. It is a useful bird, however, devouring rodents that raid fields and damage stored grain. Like other owls, it sleeps during the day and hunts at night with a well-developed sense of hearing and sight. Its color is light brownish yellow with a white mask around the eyes and cheeks. The whole leg is covered with feathers that protect it against the bites of struggling victims in its talons.<\/p>\n<p>Some modern translations mention the barn or white owl by name (Lv 11:17, <span>njb<\/span>; 11:18, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>njb<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above), Owl, Scops (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlGreat\">Owl, Great<\/p>\n<p>Large owl, standing nearly two feet (60.9 centimeters) tall <em>(Asio otus).<\/em> The color is mouse gray with gray-brown spots and black stripes. As one of its names indicates, it has tufted “ears” and is sometimes called the great horned owl. It feeds on rodents, such as rats and mice. It winters in Israel among ruins and in groves.<\/p>\n<p>The great owl may be the owl mentioned in the Bible among the birds of desolation that will inhabit devastated Edom (Is 34:11, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). It is also mentioned by name in some translations of the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlLittle\">Owl, Little<\/p>\n<p>Smallest of all nocturnal birds of prey. Chiefly insectivorous, the little owl <em>(Athene noctua glaux)<\/em> also feeds at times on tiny birds. It is the most common owl in the Holy Land, dwelling among ruins, tombstones, rocks, and thickets (perhaps the owl of Ps 102:6). Its voice sounds like that of a dying person. On occasion it may be observed perched on a rock with its large eyes gazing off into the distance, a pose that the ancients considered a sign of wisdom. The Greeks associated the little owl with the goddess Athena. It is mentioned by name in several translations (Lv 11:17, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>; Dt 14:16, <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OwlScops\">Owl, Scops<\/p>\n<p>Small owl <em>(Otus scops)<\/em> distinguished by two horn-shaped crests of hairlike feathers on its head. It perches in an inclined posture and hops and dances like a goat. During the hatching period, the male’s hooting sounds like a moan. The scops owl feeds on insects, rodents, and birds. During invasions of mice or locusts, these owls have appeared in large flocks and helped to destroy the pests. They have been known to attack humans who intrude on their nests. They are well-known inhabitants of Eurasia and Africa.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars suggest that the scops is the true screech owl, because of its whistling calls that resound through the night. The screech owl is mentioned only once in Scripture (Is 34:14, <span>kjv<\/span>), but that translation is the subject of scholarly debate. Following traditional Jewish mythology, some translations use the Hebrew word <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">lilith<\/span><em>)<\/em> as a proper name. In Jewish tradition Lilith was a witch-demon who, before Eve’s creation, was Adam’s wife. She became the mother of demons and was thought to attack children during the night; thus the name “Lilith” is translated “night hag” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “night monster” (<span>nasb<\/span>). Most scholars favoring the mythical interpretation, however, suggest that Isaiah was using a popular legend to evoke a sense of desolation and did not himself believe in the existence of Lilith. There is little support for “screech owl” as an appropriate translation of the name.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Owl; Owl, Barn or White (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Partridge\">Partridge<\/p>\n<p>Most common game bird in the Holy Land. The partridge resembles a chicken in its basic anatomy but has a less chunky body and a longer tail. Two species of partridge inhabit the Holy Land: the sand partridge <em>(Ammoperdix heyi),<\/em> found near the Dead Sea, in the Jordan River valley, and in the Sinai Desert; and the chukar partridge <em>(Alectoris graeca).<\/em> The sand partridge is a medium-sized bird with yellow feet. The male has sandy-buff plumage, upper tail feathers penciled and barred with brown, and a chestnut and white undersurface. The female is a grayish buff. The chukar partridge resembles the common French partridge of Europe, having a body about 16 inches (40.6 centimeters) long. It is covered with beautiful and radiantly colored feathers.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical reference (1 Sm 26:20; probably the sand partridge because of the geographical context) alludes to the common method of catching it by chasing. It was also hunted with snares (cf. Ps 91:3) or by hunters hiding in a blind. The fast-running partridge soon becomes exhausted, which enables hunters to run it to the ground and kill it. Nevertheless, by running and jumping, it can ascend very steep cliffs. The bird finds refuge among bushes into which its brownish-green feathers blend protectively. If it were not such a prolific breeder, it would probably have become extinct by being hunted for food.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical description of the partridge gathering a brood she did not hatch (Jer 17:11) seems to be based on the fact that the hen lays at least two clutches of eggs, one for herself and one for the cock to incubate.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Peacock\">Peacock<\/p>\n<p>Member of the quail, partridge, and pheasant family, the peacock <em>(Pavo cristatus)<\/em> is actually the male peafowl. Its mate is properly known as the peahen. The male attracts attention because of a stately, luxurious appearance enhanced by magnificent feathers. The breast is a brilliant metallic blue, and each tail feather has a brilliant eye near the tip. When lowered, the unusually long tail feathers form a train behind the peacock on the ground, giving it an overall length of up to six feet (1.8 meters). The train can also be raised to form a huge fan adorned with the multicolored eyes. During courtship the feathers are raised and vibrated to make a distinct rustling noise. The rather drab peahen lacks the long train.<\/p>\n<p>Because it is not native to the Holy Land, the peacocks referred to in 1 Kings 10:22 and 2 Chronicles 9:21 are thought by some scholars to be Old World monkeys or baboons brought from east Africa, or guinea hens from the upper Nile River region. There is evidence, however, that the Phoenicians introduced peacocks to the Egyptian pharaoh, perhaps as early as the time of King Solomon. It is possible that Solomon’s trade expeditions ranged as far as India, where the peacock is native. The peacock was also well known to the Greeks and Romans. Alexander the Great prized its beauty and forbade his soldiers to kill the bird.<\/p>\n<p>In the early Christian church the peacock became a symbol of the immortality promised in the resurrection of Christ. In addition, the eyes of its tail came to represent the all-seeing eye of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Pelican\">Pelican<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all aquatic birds, considerably larger even than the swan. The pelican <em>(Pelecanus onocrotalus)<\/em> is generally about 50 inches (127 centimeters) long with a 16-inch (40.6-centimeters) beak, the upper part of which is hooked downward at the end, facilitating fish catching. The lower part of the bill supports a yellow pouch extending down the throat. The pouch may hold up to three gallons (11.4 liters) of food (small fish) and water. The pelican’s webbed feet are peculiar in having webs between all four toes. Pelicans are expert swimmers as well as efficient fliers. The pelican’s massive body, long neck, and comparatively small head give it proportions that make rising from the water difficult. To take off, a pelican must first flap awkwardly along the surface, pounding at the water with its legs.<\/p>\n<p>Pelicans fly and nest in groups. Both sexes care for the young that hatch from the one to four eggs. Whereas most birds feed their young by placing food into their mouths, the pelican reverses the process; the young pelican sticks its head and most of its body into its mother’s throat and plucks partially digested food from the mother’s crop. The deep penetration of the young’s beak into the mother’s gullet led ancients to believe that the young were feeding on the blood of the mother’s breast, thus giving rise to wide usage of the pelican as a symbol of Christ’s atonement, and of charity in general.<\/p>\n<p>The roseate pelican is white, at times with a faint rose tinge, and has black feathers growing from the wing joint farthest from the body. The legs, pouch, and skin around the eyes are yellow; the hook of the beak is red. This species may grow up to six feet (1.8 meters) long with a wingspread of up to eight feet (2.4 meters). During the breeding season, the coloration of the exposed areas of the roseate pelican’s legs and face changes from gray to bright orange or red. At the same time the white feathers acquire a beautiful pink tint originating from an oil-gland secretion. The oil is spread throughout the plumage by the bird as it preens.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars question whether “pelican” is an appropriate translation of the Hebrew in several verses, believing rather that the word refers to one of the owls, hawks, or vultures. Most translations include the pelican in the lists of ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17). Opinion on the other references is more sharply divided. Some scholars maintain that the desert context of the verses eliminates the possibility of a water bird like the pelican (cf. Ps 102:6, “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Is 34:11, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “hawk,” <span>rsv<\/span>; Zep 2:14, “cormorant,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>). On the other hand, the roseate pelican frequents the rivers, lakes, and marshes of the Holy Land. After flying out to sea as far as 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to swoop down on fish near the surface, the pelican often returns inland to a deserted place to digest its enormous meal. Thus, the pelican may be the lonely wilderness bird of those passages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PigeonorDove\">Pigeon or Dove<\/p>\n<p>Species of the pigeon family (Columbidae). In common usage the names “pigeon” and “dove” are virtually interchangeable. The common domestic pigeon familiar to city dwellers the world over, for example, is actually a descendant of the wild rock dove. Both names are used in English translations of the Bible to translate the same Hebrew word. A second Hebrew word is usually translated “turtledove.” Nevertheless, it seems clear that the ancient Hebrews recognized differences among dove species.<\/p>\n<p>At least six species of pigeon or dove reside in modern Israel: the rock, ring, and stock doves (genus <em>Columba<\/em>), and the turtle, collared, and palm doves (genus <em>Streptopelia<\/em>). Of the six, the rock dove <em>(Columba livia)<\/em> and the turtledove <em>(Streptopelia turtur)<\/em> seem to be the two most often referred to in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Pigeons vary in size from 6 to over 12 inches (15 to 30 centimeters). The most colorful Israeli species is the rock dove, which can be a beautiful silvery gray with grayish-green iridescent plumage on the wings (noted by David, Ps 68:13). The smaller doves <em>(Streptopelia)<\/em> are less colorful, mostly gray or buff with a blackish or checkered half collar on the back of the neck. Pigeons have short necks and small heads, plump bodies, and short wings controlled by strong muscles that enable them to fly considerable distances. The smaller doves have longer tails.<\/p>\n<p>At present, the wild rock dove is found primarily in the area around the Sea of Galilee and farther to the south in the many ravines leading down to the Dead Sea. Wild rock doves prefer to build their nests on rocks and cliff faces, a fact precisely described in Scripture (Sg 2:14; Jer 48:28). All Israeli doves build fragile nests of scraps of vegetation. Eggs are hatched twice a year. Doves seldom lay more than two eggs. The young are cared for in the nest by both parents, who rove over the fields eating seeds and weeds. The adult’s crop contains digested food in a milky condition, called pigeon’s milk, which can be regurgitated and fed to the young.<\/p>\n<p>During courtship there is a great deal of rivalry among the male doves. The turtledove’s courtship dance is an awesome aerial display. The attention to courtship, the joint care of young, and the solicitude of the parents for each other, noted from earliest times, have made the dove one of the most popular symbols of love and peace (Sg 1:15; 2:14; 4:1; 5:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major distinction between pigeons (ring doves) and turtledoves seems to have been recognized by ancient writers. Pigeons are year-round residents and easily tamed, whereas turtledoves are migratory. Turtledoves were confined in cages singly or in pairs as pets or for sacrifices. Pigeons were probably the first birds to be domesticated, perhaps as early as Noah’s time (Gn 8:8-12). They were depicted on the earliest Egyptian monuments, and their edibility was mentioned in early Egyptian texts. Before long, domestic pigeons were regarded as evidence of a household’s prosperity. In the more prosperous households they nested in dovecotes of molded pottery clay fashioned in latticelike structures (hence the “windows” of Is 60:8).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there were many dovecotes in the parks around Herod the Great’s palace in Jerusalem. The dove’s popularity was due not only to its docility but also to its desirability as food and as an acceptable and relatively inexpensive sacrifice. The turtledove may have been regarded more highly as a sacrifice because of its wildness and consequent lesser availability. The two biblical references to turtledoves not in a sacrificial context refer to their migratory habits and to their arrival in Israel in the spring (Sg 2:12; Jer 8:7; cf. Hos 11:11).<\/p>\n<p>Most of the references to doves and pigeons in the Bible are in statements about sacrificial procedures (Gn 15:7-10; Lv 1:14; 5:7; 12:6; Nm 6:10; Lk 2:24). Other references, however, include a range of observations and symbolic usages of the dove. Its throaty moaning was often observed (Is 38:14; 59:11; Ez 7:16; Na 2:7). Its power of flight was well known (Ps 55:6), as were its beauty (Sg 1:15; 4:1; 5:12), its gentleness and loyalty to its mate (Sg 2:14; 5:2; 6:9), its affection (Ps 74:19), and its innocence (Mt 10:16). The one negative reference to doves is in Hosea 7:11, where they are said to be senseless and foolish, perhaps in reference to their overly trusting nature.<\/p>\n<p>Of NT references, perhaps the most significant is the description of the Holy Spirit at Christ’s baptism as a descending dove (Mt 3:16). The dove’s loving nature made it natural for early Christians to connect the dove image with the concept of the Comforter. Since then the dove has remained the most popular symbol of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Quail\">Quail<\/p>\n<p>Short, stocky birds with bills and feet similar to those of chickens; hence they are adapted to eating seeds or insects. Quail <em>(Coturnix coturnix)<\/em> are the smallest of the subfamily of poultry that also includes pheasants and partridges. Quail (or “quails,” another plural form) are about ten inches (25.4 centimeters) long and have small, rounded wings. They burst from their hiding places in the grass or bushes with a whirring sound. The belly of the quail is white. Up to 18 eggs are laid, and if the mother dies, the male has been known to assume the care of the young. Quail of the Mediterranean region winter in the Sudan and migrate northward in vast flocks in the spring. Quail cannot maintain a long sustained flight but make use of wind currents to keep them aloft.<\/p>\n<p>Enormous flocks of quail twice served as food for the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai, when the birds were driven down in the desert miraculously by winds (Ex 16:13; Nm 11:31-32; Ps 105:40). The second time they were probably flying along the Gulf of Aqaba and were blown off course by the east wind (Nm 11:31; Ps 78:26-28). Their inability to sustain long flight may account for their low flying level—two cubits, or about 40 inches (101.6 centimeters). When exhausted, they were easily caught by hand (Nm 11:31-32). Quail were considered clean and the most delicate eating of all game birds, and they were preserved by drying in the sun.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Raven\">Raven<\/p>\n<p>Member of the crow family (Corvidae). The Hebrew word for “raven” means “black one.” The raven (<em>Corvus corax<\/em>) weighs about three pounds (1.36 kilograms) and varies from 22 to 26 inches (56 to 66 centimeters) in length. Its tail is broader in the middle than at either end. Eight species are found in Israel: three ravens, two jackdaws, one crow, one rook, and one chough. The crow, about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters) long, is smaller than a raven, and its tail is uniform in width. The raven’s most conspicuous feature is its glossy black iridescent plumage.<\/p>\n<p>Ravens and crows have survived in spite of the dislike many humans have for them. Excellent fliers, they migrate by day and congregate in great flocks of up to several hundred thousand. During the nesting season, they make nests of sticks in which two to seven eggs are laid. Ravens mate for life. Equipped with strong wings, a strong bill, and strong feet, ravens can live in isolated places from which they range widely for food. That it did not return to the ark was a good sign to Noah, indicating that the raven could find food and possibly a place to rest on dry mountaintops (Gn 8:7).<\/p>\n<p>The raven, essentially a scavenger, was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:15; Dt 14:14). Yet ravens fed Elijah at God’s command (1 Kgs 17:4-6). Job was told that God gave the raven its food (Jb 38:41), as the psalmist and Jesus repeated (Ps 147:9; Lk 12:24). The raven’s glistening black plumage inspired the bride’s comparison of her beloved’s hair (Sg 5:11). They prefer desolate, uninhabited areas as their home territory (Is 34:11). Ravens are crafty, active birds. Some are capable of speaking, solving puzzles, and performing feats of memory. Bold and curious, they sometimes use their talents for theft.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Seagull\">Seagull<\/p>\n<p>Robust seabirds, primarily scavengers (family Laridae). Several species of gulls live along the seacoast of the Holy Land. They are usually gray-backed with white heads and underparts and black wing tips. The slender bill ends in a downward curve.<\/p>\n<p>Seagulls may be 8 to 30 inches (20 to 76 centimeters) long. Many species migrate, traveling long distances with their superb flying ability. Gulls can also swim easily because of their webbed feet. Their voice is like a harsh scream or squawk. In nesting season many nest together in any available place, such as a cliff or tree. Both male and female incubate and care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>Because gulls will eat almost anything, they are listed as ritually unclean birds (Lv 11:16; Dt 14:15, <span>asv<\/span> has “sea mew,” a common European gull). Some commentators believe that those passages refer to an owl or to the cuckoo and not to the seagull.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cuckoo (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Sparrow\">Sparrow<\/p>\n<p>Small bird of the finch family (Fringillidae) or the weaver finch family (Ploceidae), considered to be of little worth. The Hebrew word is a general term for “bird” and refers to any small bird such as a sparrow, finch, thrush, or starling. In translation, however, the word sometimes refers to the common English or house sparrow (<em>Passer domestica;<\/em> Ps 84:3; Prv 26:2).<\/p>\n<p>Dull in color with a black throat, the male house sparrow is a noisy and energetic creature. The nest, when built in open places, has an opening on the side and is made of almost anything available. Sparrows also nest in sheltered places, in dwellings, boxes, or holes in trees. They lay four to seven eggs.<\/p>\n<p>The common or house sparrow was known in ancient Greece and Egypt. There it had a reputation for invading fields in large swarms and picking the seeds from them. It is a permanent resident of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The sparrow is prolific and lives in close association with humans. It was considered ritually clean. Sparrows brought low prices in countries where they were sold (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). Today in Near Eastern marketplaces, boys offer live sparrows for sale. Tied together in groups of four to six by strings attached to one leg, the birds fly about over the boys’ heads. Evidently such a sight was common in NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Stork\">Stork<\/p>\n<p>Long-legged, white wading bird (genus <em>Ciconia<\/em>) having large, powerful wings with glossy black primary and secondary feathers. The flapping of its wings produces a loud rushing sound. Connecting membranes between the toes prevent the bird from sinking into the mud. Its red bill is sharp and long, serving to seize and lift its prey out of the water. Storks are mute, lacking a voice box.<\/p>\n<p>Flocks of storks pass through the Holy Land during their September migration on the way to central and southern Africa and likewise in the spring on their return flight to their homes in northern Israel, Syria, and Europe. Storks travel in vast flocks during the day, spreading out against the sky.<\/p>\n<p>The stork’s faithful tending of the young is proverbial, as is its habit of returning annually to the same nesting place. Storks have the habit of adding to their nests each year, and it is possible to find nests that are 100 years old and have a height of more than three feet (.9 meter).<\/p>\n<p>Two species of storks frequent the Holy Land. The white stork <em>(Ciconia alba)<\/em> is 40 inches (101.6 centimeters) tall, and its wingspread is six feet (1.8 meters), enabling it to move with a slow, sustained flight or to soar. In folklore the white stork is sometimes considered to be a harbinger of good fortune.<\/p>\n<p>The black stork <em>(Ciconia nigra),<\/em> common around the Dead Sea valley, nests in trees; hence it may be the tree-dwelling species referred to in Psalm 104:17. The Hebrew name for “stork” means literally the “kingly one,” or the “loyal one,” a reference to the care of the bird for its young. Like the heron, the stork was ceremonially unclean because of its diet of aquatic organisms, refuse, small animals, birds, and reptiles (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Jeremiah mentioned the stork’s uncanny and instinctive knowledge of the time of its migration (Jer 8:7). Its impressive wings figured in one of Zechariah’s visions (Zec 5:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swallow\">Swallow<\/p>\n<p>Small, nearly black, forked-tailed bird with long, tapering wings, noted for its graceful flight <em>(hirundo rustica).<\/em> The small, weak feet are poorly adapted for walking. Swallows resemble swifts in shape and life habits but are somewhat smaller.<\/p>\n<p>The swallow’s large mouth enables it to catch insects while in flight. Colors vary from brown and blue to white. Swallows often nest in buildings, a feature noticed by the psalmist, who reported a swallow’s home at the temple (Ps 84:3).<\/p>\n<p>Swallows are basically resident in Israel, whereas the swift is a migratory bird noted for the regularity of its migratory schedule. The “swallow” of Isaiah 38:14 probably refers to a swift, as does Jeremiah 8:7, where the dependability of the bird is contrasted with the irregularity of God’s people. Proverbs 26:2 may be a reference to either the swallow or the swift.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swift (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swan\">Swan<\/p>\n<p>Large, graceful water birds. Two species of swan (genus <em>Cygnus<\/em>) are found in the Middle East as passing migrants <em>(Cygnus olor<\/em> and <em>Cygnus musicus).<\/em> Swans are known as the best musicians among the birds and were considered sacred to the god Apollo by the Greeks. Their voices sound like flutes and harps.<\/p>\n<p>The references in Leviticus 11:18 and Deuteronomy 14:16 (<span>kjv<\/span>) are probably not to the swan but to the water hen or the barn owl, since there seems little reason to declare the vegetarian swan an unclean animal. <em>See also<\/em> Owl, Barn or White (above); Water Hen (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Swift\">Swift<\/p>\n<p>Small, strong flyers (genus <em>Apus<\/em>). Like the swallow, the swift has long, bent wings and a cleft tail, enabling it to obtain great speed as it skims the ground and sweeps through the air. A swift devours a great many harmful insects, catching them in its mouth in flight. Many swifts make their nests in rooftops and in nooks and crannies of city walls. Their nests are built with strong feathers cemented together with saliva. Other swifts live in caves and clefts of rocks.<\/p>\n<p>Common swifts are native to Israel, and in the Jordan Valley they occur in large flocks. Isaiah 38:14 (<span>niv<\/span>) seems to be clear reference to the swift’s plaintive call, since the swallow’s sharp chirp is not a striking simile for a distraught king’s cry. The swift has a soft, delicate voice, and its cry could be easily interpreted as melodious wailing.<\/p>\n<p>The migratory swifts arrive on a precise schedule in the Holy Land in late winter, and immense flocks fill the cities with their cries. Thus the reference in Jeremiah 8:7 to swallows, which are largely permanent residents, is probably to swifts.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Swallow (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"Vulture\">Vulture<\/p>\n<p>Subfamily (Aegypiinae) of the hawk family (Accipitridae). Each of the four species of Old World vultures is found in the Holy Land: the Egyptian, griffon, black, and bearded vulture (the bearded vulture is also known as the lammergeier). These birds range in size from the 24-inch (61-centimeters) Egyptian vulture to the huge bearded vulture, largest of all flying birds in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>Most vultures are brown or black, having a short neck and a short, hooked bill with which they tear the dead animal flesh of which they are fond. All vultures, except the bearded, have bare or down-covered heads and necks, enabling these scavengers to penetrate deep into a carcass without spoiling the plumage. Excellent eyesight enables a vulture to locate a carcass from a lofty soaring position. Considering the decayed condition of most of its food, a vulture’s poor sense of smell may be a fortunate limitation. Vultures nest in any convenient place; both parents care for the young.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word usually translated “eagle” in the OT may have been a general term for all large birds of prey, including vultures. Thus many of the passages about eagles may refer to either the eagle or the vulture (cf. Lv 11:13; Dt 14:12, <span>nasb<\/span> mg). Such passages include references to nesting habits (Jb 39:27-28; Jer 49:16; Ob 1:4), care for fledglings (Dt 32:11), powers of flight (Ex 19:4; Dt 28:49; Jb 9:26; Lam 4:19), and extremely high soaring altitude (Prv 23:5; 30:19; Is 40:31). Despite variations among translations, the vulture clearly belongs in the list of unclean birds because of its foul diet (Lv 11:13, 18; Dt 14:12, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Several references to the eagle in the <span>kjv<\/span> have been changed to “vulture” in modern translations. The change seems appropriate in the references to the vulture as a sign of present or impending doom (Lam 4:19; Hos 8:1). Likewise the eye-plucking bird of Proverbs 30:17 is probably a vulture. The phrase “bald as the eagle” (Mi 1:16) clearly should read “bald as the vulture,” since there are no bald eagles in Israel and most vultures are bald. Since the vulture, like the eagle, was a symbol of sovereignty and domination in the ancient Near East, some gods were represented as vultures. Thus Ezekiel’s comparison of the kings of Babylon and Egypt to eagles may be conceived alternatively as comparisons to vultures (Ez 17:3, 7). Jesus’ reference to the eagles congregating around corpses at the end times (Mt 24:28) should also be revised to vultures, since eagles are usually solitary eaters, whereas vultures generally flock together around carrion.<\/p>\n<p>Several <span>kjv<\/span> references to vultures are usually translated “kite” or “falcon” in modern translations (cf. various versions of Lv 11:14; Dt 14:13; Jb 28:7; Is 34:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Kestrel; Kite; Lammergeier; Vulture, Black, or Osprey; Vulture, Egyptian; Vulture, Griffon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureBlackorOsprey\">Vulture, Black, or Osprey<\/p>\n<p>Diurnal flesh eater, a little over three feet (.9 meter) long with a wingspread of over three yards (2.7 meters). The feathers of the black or osprey vulture (<em>Aegypius monachus<\/em>) are black and the head and upper part of the neck are bald like those of other carrion eaters. It nests in the Jordan River valley and seems to have been abundant in biblical times. Today it is quite rare. The black vulture is probably the osprey of Leviticus 11:13 and Deuteronomy 14:12.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureEgyptian\">Vulture, Egyptian<\/p>\n<p>Also known as the gier eagle or as pharaoh’s hen. The plumage of the Egyptian vulture (<em>Neophron percnopterus<\/em>) is basically white with a naked head and yellow neck. The Egyptian vulture breaks bones left by other vultures. Its flight is slow and easy, and its voice is a croak. Measuring about 24 inches (61 centimeters) in length, it is the smallest of all the carrion-eating birds found in the Holy Land. It may be referred to in the list of unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:17, “gier eagle,” <span>kjv<\/span>; “carrion vulture,” <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VultureGriffon\">Vulture, Griffon<\/p>\n<p>One of the largest flying birds in the Holy Land <em>(Gyps fulvus).<\/em> Until a generation ago, the griffon vulture was one of the most common birds in the Holy Land. Today it is on the verge of extinction. Many have been killed by eating poisonous bait meant for foxes and jackals. In addition, its reproduction is limited; the female lays only one or two eggs a year.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture measures about four feet (121.9 centimeters) in length and up to ten feet (3 meters) between wing tips. Its beak is extremely strong, and its short toes are fitted with blunt talons. It is a light-brown bird with a pale yellow head and neck that are almost bare, being covered only with a very fine down.<\/p>\n<p>The griffon vulture feeds mostly on carrion, but also on locusts and small tortoises. It is able to go without food for several days with no ill effects, but when it does break its fast, it gorges itself. It is found especially in the region of the Sea of Galilee. Most biblical references to the vulture are likely to be to the griffon vulture.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eagle; Vulture (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"WaterHen\">Water Hen<\/p>\n<p>Small water bird of the rail family. The water hen listed among unclean birds (Lv 11:18; Dt 14:16, <span>rsv<\/span> only) may be the biblical bird most difficult to identify. Several alternatives have been suggested, including the swan (<span>kjv<\/span>), one of the owls (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>), or the marsh hen (<span>tlb<\/span>). Most scholars rule out the swan, since it is a vegetarian bird and thus should not be considered unclean. An owl remains a possibility.<\/p>\n<p>The marsh hen is a rail, several species of which inhabit Israel. One of those species is the purple gallinule <em>(Porphyrio porphyrio).<\/em> Rails are very thin birds varying from 6 to 20 inches (15 to 51 centimeters) in length. They live in marshes, where they eat a great variety of animal and vegetable matter, thus making them a candidate for inclusion in the Mosaic lists of unclean animals.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIRDS Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture. Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult ...","summary_en":"BIRDS Feathered vertebrates of the class Aves. Over 8,000 species of birds are known. Approximately 400 species are found in the Holy Land and about 40 are mentioned in Scripture. Modern scientists classify organisms on the basis of internal and external structure, but the biblical writers generally classified organisms according to habitat. Thus, in the Bible, bats are listed with birds as creatures of the air (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18). Precise identification of biblical birds is often difficult ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19566,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":55056,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","summary_en":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82682,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","summary_en":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110308,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","summary_en":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137934,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:35<\/strong> While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, <em>all the other disciples<\/em> denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","summary_en":"26:35 While Peter’s denial receives the most attention, all the other disciples denied or avoided association with Christ as well (see 26:56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":10476,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachthani?*","title_en":"Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachthani?*","content_ro":"<h3>ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?*<\/h3>\n<p>One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The <span>nlt<\/span> uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine. The only difference in the two accounts is that Mark’s version is completely Aramaic, whereas Matthew retains the Hebrew word for God (which was not uncommon for Aramaic-speaking Jews). The fact that some of Jesus’ hearers thought he was calling Elijah indicates that Matthew’s version is probably the original. Elias (Elijah) could have been confused with “Eli” more easily than with “Eloi” (Mt 27:47; Mk 15:35).<\/p>\n<p>The textual variants that exist suggest the difficulties copyists and interpreters have had with Jesus’ words. After meditating on the passage, Martin Luther exclaimed, “God forsaken of God! Who can understand it?” Luther’s statement of the major theological problem, that Jesus was forsaken by God, is not the only possible understanding of the text. Debate has focused on two questions: whether in fact abandonment by God was expressed by Jesus’ use of the psalmist’s words, and why the onlookers spoke of Elijah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheCry\">Meaning of the Cry<\/p>\n<p>At one extreme, many have been struck by the starkness of Jesus’ words. Some have even seen in them a realization on the cross that he had failed and that all hope was lost for the coming of God’s kingdom. From that perspective Jesus’ words were a cry of despair over a lost cause. However, such a view hardly fits the rest of the NT presentation of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At the opposite extreme, some interpret the words as neither stark nor negative in any sense. They view the cry as an affirmation of Jesus’ faith in committing himself to God (Lk 23:46). To such interpreters, the fact that Jesus began his question with “My God, my God” and used a biblical quotation indicates religious reverence and continued faith. In Jewish practice sometimes the first line of a psalm or song would be quoted to refer to the whole work. Hence Jesus might have been quoting Psalm 22:1 as a way of referring to the whole psalm. Psalm 22 is clearly the lament of a righteous sufferer. Psalms of lament always expressed a prayer of confidence in God and praise to God as well as a prayer for help from God. Thus, from a certain point of view, the cry from the cross can be seen as a confident prayer.<\/p>\n<p>Many biblical scholars find the second view as unconvincing as the first. The Gospel writers did not clarify the meaning of the cry. Yet if the words were an expression of confidence or praise, some indication would be expected in the text. As they stand, the words are hardly an expression of religious reverence. The words themselves and the fact they were expressed in a loud cry do not suggest a prayer of confidence or praise.<\/p>\n<p>Another approach views the words as expressing Jesus’ feeling of isolation in a moment of extreme anguish but rejects the notion that he was actually forsaken by God.<\/p>\n<p>But the interpretation that has become “traditional” is that Jesus <em>was<\/em> forsaken by God. In that view the context of the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:39-46) indicates the kind of conflict expressed in Jesus’ cry on the cross. Jesus’ identification with sinners was so real that taking on their sin broke the closeness of his communion with the Father. Thus, Jesus’ abandonment by God is seen as an important aspect of the atonement. Although stressing that Jesus was actually forsaken, the traditional view goes on to stress that the unity of the Trinity remained unbroken.<\/p>\n<p>The explanation of such a paradox is not easy. Some view it as a divine mystery and make no attempt to explain it at all. Others attempt to make some kind of distinction between what happened on the cross and the reality of God’s being. For example, in the early centuries of the church the view was expressed that only Jesus’ humanity was affected by the separation, so that his deity remained intact with God. Others argue that Jesus was separated from the Father “functionally” in the work of salvation but not “really” with respect to his existence.<\/p>\n<p>The refusal of the Gospel writers to explain Jesus’ cry should make scholars hesitate to give precise or dogmatic explanations. At the least, one can confidently state that (1) the cry reflects the reality of Jesus’ humanity in the face of death, (2) the particular kind of death (“even death on a cross,” Phil 2:8) was especially scandalous, and (3) Christ’s identification with sinners was a horribly painful experience. Thus, although the cry is somehow related to the Atonement, the biblical texts do not discuss whether Jesus was absolutely abandoned. Further, they do not explain how God could recoil from sin at the same time that “in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19). In doing justice to the depth of emotion expressed in the cry, one should be cautious not to force the text to say something the author did not intend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahandtheCry\">Elijah and the Cry<\/p>\n<p>Various possibilities of connections between the cry and Elijah have been offered. If the cry refers to the whole of Psalm 22, mention of Elijah by the bystanders would show that they understood Jesus’ words as expressing confidence in salvation. A salvation mediated by Elijah would have seemed natural to the Jews, who often saw Elijah as a deliverer of the righteous oppressed. Others claim that the bystanders were willfully and maliciously distorting Jesus’ words in order to mock him. Still others view the mention of Elijah as an honest misunderstanding because of the similarity of the words. The view that one adopts will depend to some extent on how Jesus’ cry is understood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crucifixion; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?*<\/h3>\n<p>One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The <span>nlt<\/span> uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine. The only difference in the two accounts is that Mark’s version is completely Aramaic, whereas Matthew retains the Hebrew word for God (which was not uncommon for Aramaic-speaking Jews). The fact that some of Jesus’ hearers thought he was calling Elijah indicates that Matthew’s version is probably the original. Elias (Elijah) could have been confused with “Eli” more easily than with “Eloi” (Mt 27:47; Mk 15:35).<\/p>\n<p>The textual variants that exist suggest the difficulties copyists and interpreters have had with Jesus’ words. After meditating on the passage, Martin Luther exclaimed, “God forsaken of God! Who can understand it?” Luther’s statement of the major theological problem, that Jesus was forsaken by God, is not the only possible understanding of the text. Debate has focused on two questions: whether in fact abandonment by God was expressed by Jesus’ use of the psalmist’s words, and why the onlookers spoke of Elijah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MeaningoftheCry\">Meaning of the Cry<\/p>\n<p>At one extreme, many have been struck by the starkness of Jesus’ words. Some have even seen in them a realization on the cross that he had failed and that all hope was lost for the coming of God’s kingdom. From that perspective Jesus’ words were a cry of despair over a lost cause. However, such a view hardly fits the rest of the NT presentation of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At the opposite extreme, some interpret the words as neither stark nor negative in any sense. They view the cry as an affirmation of Jesus’ faith in committing himself to God (Lk 23:46). To such interpreters, the fact that Jesus began his question with “My God, my God” and used a biblical quotation indicates religious reverence and continued faith. In Jewish practice sometimes the first line of a psalm or song would be quoted to refer to the whole work. Hence Jesus might have been quoting Psalm 22:1 as a way of referring to the whole psalm. Psalm 22 is clearly the lament of a righteous sufferer. Psalms of lament always expressed a prayer of confidence in God and praise to God as well as a prayer for help from God. Thus, from a certain point of view, the cry from the cross can be seen as a confident prayer.<\/p>\n<p>Many biblical scholars find the second view as unconvincing as the first. The Gospel writers did not clarify the meaning of the cry. Yet if the words were an expression of confidence or praise, some indication would be expected in the text. As they stand, the words are hardly an expression of religious reverence. The words themselves and the fact they were expressed in a loud cry do not suggest a prayer of confidence or praise.<\/p>\n<p>Another approach views the words as expressing Jesus’ feeling of isolation in a moment of extreme anguish but rejects the notion that he was actually forsaken by God.<\/p>\n<p>But the interpretation that has become “traditional” is that Jesus <em>was<\/em> forsaken by God. In that view the context of the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:39-46) indicates the kind of conflict expressed in Jesus’ cry on the cross. Jesus’ identification with sinners was so real that taking on their sin broke the closeness of his communion with the Father. Thus, Jesus’ abandonment by God is seen as an important aspect of the atonement. Although stressing that Jesus was actually forsaken, the traditional view goes on to stress that the unity of the Trinity remained unbroken.<\/p>\n<p>The explanation of such a paradox is not easy. Some view it as a divine mystery and make no attempt to explain it at all. Others attempt to make some kind of distinction between what happened on the cross and the reality of God’s being. For example, in the early centuries of the church the view was expressed that only Jesus’ humanity was affected by the separation, so that his deity remained intact with God. Others argue that Jesus was separated from the Father “functionally” in the work of salvation but not “really” with respect to his existence.<\/p>\n<p>The refusal of the Gospel writers to explain Jesus’ cry should make scholars hesitate to give precise or dogmatic explanations. At the least, one can confidently state that (1) the cry reflects the reality of Jesus’ humanity in the face of death, (2) the particular kind of death (“even death on a cross,” Phil 2:8) was especially scandalous, and (3) Christ’s identification with sinners was a horribly painful experience. Thus, although the cry is somehow related to the Atonement, the biblical texts do not discuss whether Jesus was absolutely abandoned. Further, they do not explain how God could recoil from sin at the same time that “in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19). In doing justice to the depth of emotion expressed in the cry, one should be cautious not to force the text to say something the author did not intend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahandtheCry\">Elijah and the Cry<\/p>\n<p>Various possibilities of connections between the cry and Elijah have been offered. If the cry refers to the whole of Psalm 22, mention of Elijah by the bystanders would show that they understood Jesus’ words as expressing confidence in salvation. A salvation mediated by Elijah would have seemed natural to the Jews, who often saw Elijah as a deliverer of the righteous oppressed. Others claim that the bystanders were willfully and maliciously distorting Jesus’ words in order to mock him. Still others view the mention of Elijah as an honest misunderstanding because of the similarity of the words. The view that one adopts will depend to some extent on how Jesus’ cry is understood.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crucifixion; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?* One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The nlt uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century AD Palestine. The only difference in the t...","summary_en":"ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?* One of Jesus’ cries from the cross, properly translated “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (The nlt uses an alternate spelling, “lema,” for the third word in the expression.) This form of the “cry of dereliction” (Mt 27:46) is slightly different from its other recorded form, “Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mk 15:34). Both versions are adaptations of Psalm 22:1 in the Aramaic, the common language of first-century AD Palestine. The only difference in the t...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13715,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gethsemane","title_en":"Gethsemane","content_ro":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","summary_en":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19556,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24838,"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":55057,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","summary_en":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55058,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","summary_en":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82683,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","summary_en":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82684,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","summary_en":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110309,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","summary_en":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110310,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","summary_en":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137935,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36-46<\/strong> This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","summary_en":"26:36-46 This scene reveals the depth of Jesus’ awareness of the suffering that awaited him on the cross, as well as his utter commitment to God’s will (see 20:28). Expressions in 26:41-42 echo the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137936,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:36","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:36<\/strong> <em>Gethsemane<\/em> is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","summary_en":"26:36 Gethsemane is the name of an olive orchard approximately 250 yards east of Jerusalem’s Golden Gate, overlooking the Kidron Valley on the edge of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples apparently met there often (Luke 22:39-40; John 18:1-2).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":42115,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42360,"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":42511,"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":69741,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69986,"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":70137,"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":97367,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97612,"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":97763,"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":124993,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125238,"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":125389,"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":18390,"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":20132,"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":30038,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38970,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zebedee","title_en":"Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>ZEBEDEE<\/h3>\n<p>Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZEBEDEE<\/h3>\n<p>Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZEBEDEE Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.","summary_en":"ZEBEDEE Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55059,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:37","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:37","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","summary_en":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82685,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:37","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:37","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","summary_en":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110311,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:37","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:37","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","summary_en":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137937,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:37","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:37","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:37<\/strong> <em>He took Peter . . . James and John:<\/em> These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus <em>became anguished and distressed<\/em> from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","summary_en":"26:37 He took Peter . . . James and John: These three, apparently the leaders of the apostles, received special revelation (17:1-13) and accompanied Jesus in this difficult hour. • Jesus became anguished and distressed from contemplating the Father’s plan for him, to absorb God’s wrath toward humans for their sin (see 27:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":35992,"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":55060,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:38","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","summary_en":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82686,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:38","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","summary_en":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110312,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:38","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","summary_en":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137938,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:38","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:38<\/strong> <em>crushed with grief:<\/em> See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","summary_en":"26:38 crushed with grief: See John 12:27; cp. Pss 42:5-6, 11; 43:5.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"39":[{"id":8292,"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":17336,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55061,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:39","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","summary_en":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82687,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:39","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","summary_en":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110313,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:39","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","summary_en":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137939,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:39","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:39","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:39<\/strong> <em>If it is possible:<\/em> Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • <em>Yet I want your will to be done:<\/em> His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","summary_en":"26:39 If it is possible: Jesus’ heart’s desire was for uninterrupted communion with the Father instead of coming under God’s wrath. • Yet I want your will to be done: His resolution to do the Father’s will was firm (4:1-11; 16:23; John 6:38).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66852,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Sovereignty of God","title_en":"The Sovereignty of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","summary_en":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94478,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Sovereignty of God","title_en":"The Sovereignty of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","summary_en":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122104,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Sovereignty of God","title_en":"The Sovereignty of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","summary_en":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149730,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Sovereignty of God","title_en":"The Sovereignty of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sovereignty of God<\/h3>\n<p>We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16).<\/p>\n<p>God’s sovereign hand is in everything. God is in control of the lives of all people (Ps 135:5-12), the universe, and the course of earth’s history (Isa 40:15-17; Acts 17:24; Col 1:15-20), directing it to his appointed ends (Isa 46:10; Dan 7:27-28; Matt 24:14-31; Rev 1:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>As demonstrated throughout 2 Kings, God exercises sovereign power and control over the affairs of nations. He installed and deposed the kings of Israel and Judah according to his purposes and according to the degree of their obedience. He permitted successful attacks against his people as punishment for their sins (2 Kgs 8:18-22). God was in control when the Assyrians attacked Samaria and brought down the northern kingdom (17:1-6, 18, 20). Hezekiah’s successes in Judah were due to the Lord’s blessings (18:5-7). God’s sovereign hand can be seen in all of the complex international events that happened, just as the Lord had promised, during the reigns of the final kings of Judah (23:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>God also displays his power in his answers to the prayers and petitions of his people. When Elisha prayed, God responded to his faithful prophet’s requests. Through Elisha he allowed the woman from Shunem to have a son and later brought that son back to life (4:17, 32-35). The Lord graciously answered the prayers of Jehoahaz and provided a rescuer for beleaguered Israel (13:4-5). He honored Hezekiah’s prayers for Jerusalem (19:1-7) and for his own life (20:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Paul shows that God determines the course of salvation. Paul constantly explains the unexpected development of salvation history by appealing to what God has said and done. Human decisions alone cannot explain the situation, and God has said that he will show mercy to anyone he chooses (Rom 9:15). While theologians will continue to debate the role of God’s action and the role of human decision in salvation, God’s sovereignty stands out clearly.<\/p>\n<p>Because God is sovereign, his people rightly seek to live in harmony with his will (Rom 12:1-2), in the strength that he provides (see 1 Cor 1:8-9). We can follow the example of Christ in his prayer, “I want your will to be done, not mine” (Matt 26:39). The contemporary world has set God to the side and ignores the divine influence on the course of human affairs. But God’s decisions really do direct the world as well as the personal histories of those who trust him. When we live for God’s glory (Isa 42:8; Hab 2:14; Jude 1:24-25), whatever happens is also ultimately for our good (Ps 84:11; Eph 3:16-19; Col 1:27; 2 Thes 1:11-12), and we can confidently affirm that “God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Rom 8:28)..<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 8:22; 9:29; Deut 4:39; 32:8, 39; Josh 2:11; 1 Sam 2:6-8; 2 Kgs 13:4-5; 17:1-6, 18-20; 18:5-7; 19:5-7; 20:4-6; Pss 24:1-2; 84:11; 135:5-12; Isa 40:15-17; 45:7; 46:10; Jer 27:5-7; Dan 7:27-28; Hab 2:14; John 19:11; Acts 17:24-26; Rom 8:28; 9:5-24; 1 Cor 1:8-9; Col 1:15-20; 2 Thes 1:11-12; Jude 1:24-25; Rev 1:7-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","summary_en":"The Sovereignty of God We human beings always want to think that we are in charge. We think that by our decisions and actions we can determine what will happen. However, Scripture confronts us with quite a different scenario, pointing again and again to the ultimate sovereignty of God (see, e.g., Deut 4:39; Ps 135:5-7; Isa 46:8-11; Jude 1:24-25). Although human decisions and actions are significant, the will of God is vastly more important (see Jas 4:13-16). God’s sovereign hand is in everyth...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":30041,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35651,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sleep","title_en":"Sleep","content_ro":"<h3>SLEEP<\/h3>\n<p>Sleep is spoken of in three ways in the Bible: (a) to speak of natural sleep, (b) to refer to moral or spiritual inactivity, and (c) to refer to death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NaturalSleep\">Natural Sleep<\/p>\n<p>The sleep that the human body needs is seen as a precious gift of God (Pss 4:8; 127:2). Sleep may be withheld, as God chooses and to serve his purposes (Est 6:1; Dn 6:18). God may also, to fulfill his purposes, give people deep sleep (Gn 2:21; 15:12; 1 Sm 26:12), and during a person’s sleep, God may make his will known by a dream or vision (e.g., Gn 28:11-16; Jb 4:13-17; Mt 1:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>Several statements in the book of Proverbs rebuke the lack of discipline of life shown in the undue love of sleep. For example, one proverb says, “If you love sleep, you will end in poverty. Keep your eyes open, and there will be plenty to eat!” (Prv 20:13, <span>nlt<\/span>; see also 6:9-11; 10:5; 24:32-34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MoralorSpiritualInactivity\">Moral or Spiritual Inactivity<\/p>\n<p>In a figurative way, sleep is used as a symbol of laziness, carelessness, or inactivity. Isaiah 56:10 speaks of those who failed in their responsibility as leaders of God’s people: “They love to lie there, love to sleep, to dream” (<span>tlb<\/span>). In the NT those who are the Lord’s servants are called to watch and to be sure that when their Master comes he will not find them sleeping (Mk 13:35-37; see also Mt 25:1-13; 26:40-46). Likewise, the challenge to maintain spiritual alertness and to refrain from sleep comes in a number of places in the epistles: “Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give you light” (Eph 5:14, <span>rsv<\/span>); “So be on your guard, not asleep like the others. Watch for his return and stay sober” (1 Thes 5:6, <span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Death\">Death<\/p>\n<p>Very frequently, the Bible speaks of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:13-14). In some of these references, it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in Daniel 12:2 it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead “rise up, some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (<span>tlb<\/span>). This is made more specific in many passages in the NT. When, however, we consider the full teaching of the Bible on the meaning of death for the Christian, we need to give full weight to such passages as Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 5:8, and Philippians 1:23, and especially 1 Thessalonians 5:13-14. In the first of these Jesus says to the dying thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise,” and in the second Paul speaks of death for him as going to “be with Christ.”<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SLEEP<\/h3>\n<p>Sleep is spoken of in three ways in the Bible: (a) to speak of natural sleep, (b) to refer to moral or spiritual inactivity, and (c) to refer to death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NaturalSleep\">Natural Sleep<\/p>\n<p>The sleep that the human body needs is seen as a precious gift of God (Pss 4:8; 127:2). Sleep may be withheld, as God chooses and to serve his purposes (Est 6:1; Dn 6:18). God may also, to fulfill his purposes, give people deep sleep (Gn 2:21; 15:12; 1 Sm 26:12), and during a person’s sleep, God may make his will known by a dream or vision (e.g., Gn 28:11-16; Jb 4:13-17; Mt 1:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>Several statements in the book of Proverbs rebuke the lack of discipline of life shown in the undue love of sleep. For example, one proverb says, “If you love sleep, you will end in poverty. Keep your eyes open, and there will be plenty to eat!” (Prv 20:13, <span>nlt<\/span>; see also 6:9-11; 10:5; 24:32-34).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MoralorSpiritualInactivity\">Moral or Spiritual Inactivity<\/p>\n<p>In a figurative way, sleep is used as a symbol of laziness, carelessness, or inactivity. Isaiah 56:10 speaks of those who failed in their responsibility as leaders of God’s people: “They love to lie there, love to sleep, to dream” (<span>tlb<\/span>). In the NT those who are the Lord’s servants are called to watch and to be sure that when their Master comes he will not find them sleeping (Mk 13:35-37; see also Mt 25:1-13; 26:40-46). Likewise, the challenge to maintain spiritual alertness and to refrain from sleep comes in a number of places in the epistles: “Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give you light” (Eph 5:14, <span>rsv<\/span>); “So be on your guard, not asleep like the others. Watch for his return and stay sober” (1 Thes 5:6, <span>tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Death\">Death<\/p>\n<p>Very frequently, the Bible speaks of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:13-14). In some of these references, it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in Daniel 12:2 it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead “rise up, some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (<span>tlb<\/span>). This is made more specific in many passages in the NT. When, however, we consider the full teaching of the Bible on the meaning of death for the Christian, we need to give full weight to such passages as Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 5:8, and Philippians 1:23, and especially 1 Thessalonians 5:13-14. In the first of these Jesus says to the dying thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise,” and in the second Paul speaks of death for him as going to “be with Christ.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"SLEEP Sleep is spoken of in three ways in the Bible: (a) to speak of natural sleep, (b) to refer to moral or spiritual inactivity, and (c) to refer to death. Natural Sleep The sleep that the human body needs is seen as a precious gift of God (Pss 4:8; 127:2). Sleep may be withheld, as God chooses and to serve his purposes (Est 6:1; Dn 6:18). God may also, to fulfill his purposes, give people deep sleep (Gn 2:21; 15:12; 1 Sm 26:12), and during a person’s sleep, God may make his will known by a...","summary_en":"SLEEP Sleep is spoken of in three ways in the Bible: (a) to speak of natural sleep, (b) to refer to moral or spiritual inactivity, and (c) to refer to death. Natural Sleep The sleep that the human body needs is seen as a precious gift of God (Pss 4:8; 127:2). Sleep may be withheld, as God chooses and to serve his purposes (Est 6:1; Dn 6:18). God may also, to fulfill his purposes, give people deep sleep (Gn 2:21; 15:12; 1 Sm 26:12), and during a person’s sleep, God may make his will known by a...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"45":[{"id":64965,"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":92591,"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":120217,"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":147843,"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}],"46":[{"id":42285,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69911,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97537,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125163,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"47":[{"id":24840,"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}],"48":[{"id":22216,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Peace* Kiss, Kiss","title_en":"of Peace* Kiss, Kiss","content_ro":"<h3>KISS, KISS OF PEACE*<\/h3>\n<p>Common salutation symbolizing love and fellowship. In the Bible, kissing is referred to in a wide variety of contexts. In addition to its ordinary expression among relatives (Gn 29:11; 33:4), its sensual aspect is noted (Prv 7:6-13; Sg 1:2). It is well attested as an act of homage (1 Sm 10:1; Jb 31:27), although such expressions may be heinous in God’s sight (1 Kgs 19:18; Hos 13:2). Hypocrisy, even betrayal, may accompany a kiss (Mt 26:48-49).<\/p>\n<p>Five NT texts refer to a “holy kiss,” called later in church liturgy a “kiss of peace” (Rom 16:16; 1 Cor 16:20; 2 Cor 13:12; 1 Thes 5:26; 1 Pt 5:14). Peter speaks of a “kiss of love” and mentions peace in conjunction with it. Although the practice is neither described nor limited by Scripture, the kiss was evidently exchanged between Christians as a pledge of brotherly friendship and fidelity (1 Thes 5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the generations following the apostolic era, the kiss of peace came to occupy an established place in liturgical worship. In the latter part of the second century, Justin Martyr spoke of the exchange of kisses throughout the congregation following the conclusion of prayer. Eventually, the church placed the ceremony immediately prior to Holy Communion. Later on, the actual kiss was largely replaced by a simple bow. Other variant forms of the practice are still observed in various churches.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KISS, KISS OF PEACE*<\/h3>\n<p>Common salutation symbolizing love and fellowship. In the Bible, kissing is referred to in a wide variety of contexts. In addition to its ordinary expression among relatives (Gn 29:11; 33:4), its sensual aspect is noted (Prv 7:6-13; Sg 1:2). It is well attested as an act of homage (1 Sm 10:1; Jb 31:27), although such expressions may be heinous in God’s sight (1 Kgs 19:18; Hos 13:2). Hypocrisy, even betrayal, may accompany a kiss (Mt 26:48-49).<\/p>\n<p>Five NT texts refer to a “holy kiss,” called later in church liturgy a “kiss of peace” (Rom 16:16; 1 Cor 16:20; 2 Cor 13:12; 1 Thes 5:26; 1 Pt 5:14). Peter speaks of a “kiss of love” and mentions peace in conjunction with it. Although the practice is neither described nor limited by Scripture, the kiss was evidently exchanged between Christians as a pledge of brotherly friendship and fidelity (1 Thes 5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the generations following the apostolic era, the kiss of peace came to occupy an established place in liturgical worship. In the latter part of the second century, Justin Martyr spoke of the exchange of kisses throughout the congregation following the conclusion of prayer. Eventually, the church placed the ceremony immediately prior to Holy Communion. Later on, the actual kiss was largely replaced by a simple bow. Other variant forms of the practice are still observed in various churches.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KISS, KISS OF PEACE* Common salutation symbolizing love and fellowship. In the Bible, kissing is referred to in a wide variety of contexts. In addition to its ordinary expression among relatives (Gn 29:11; 33:4), its sensual aspect is noted (Prv 7:6-13; Sg 1:2). It is well attested as an act of homage (1 Sm 10:1; Jb 31:27), although such expressions may be heinous in God’s sight (1 Kgs 19:18; Hos 13:2). Hypocrisy, even betrayal, may accompany a kiss (Mt 26:48-49). Five NT texts refer to a “ho...","summary_en":"KISS, KISS OF PEACE* Common salutation symbolizing love and fellowship. In the Bible, kissing is referred to in a wide variety of contexts. In addition to its ordinary expression among relatives (Gn 29:11; 33:4), its sensual aspect is noted (Prv 7:6-13; Sg 1:2). It is well attested as an act of homage (1 Sm 10:1; Jb 31:27), although such expressions may be heinous in God’s sight (1 Kgs 19:18; Hos 13:2). Hypocrisy, even betrayal, may accompany a kiss (Mt 26:48-49). Five NT texts refer to a “ho...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"49":[{"id":55062,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:49","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","summary_en":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82688,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:49","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","summary_en":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110314,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:49","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","summary_en":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137940,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:49","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:49<\/strong> <em>Judas . . . gave him the kiss:<\/em> Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","summary_en":"26:49 Judas . . . gave him the kiss: Judas’s use of a sign of affection to betray Jesus amplifies the heinousness of his betrayal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"50":[{"id":19559,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60917,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88543,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116169,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143795,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"51":[{"id":24113,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Malchus","title_en":"Malchus","content_ro":"<h3>MALCHUS<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MALCHUS<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MALCHUS Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.","summary_en":"MALCHUS Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55063,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:51","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","summary_en":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82689,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:51","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","summary_en":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110315,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:51","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","summary_en":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137941,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:51","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:51<\/strong> <em>one of the men with Jesus:<\/em> This was Peter (John 18:26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","summary_en":"26:51 one of the men with Jesus: This was Peter (John 18:26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"52":[{"id":60899,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88525,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116151,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143777,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holy War","title_en":"Holy War","content_ro":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holy War<\/h3>\n<p>The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help.<\/p>\n<p>First, the war against the Canaanites was commanded and led by God himself, not by mere human decision. The holy God was present with Israel in a unique way (Exod 19:5-6; 40:34-38). After Israel crossed the Jordan, it became clear that God himself was fighting against the Canaanites (e.g., Josh 6); and when he wasn’t, Israel was defeated (Josh 7). God himself defines what is and is not moral based on his own character. For ancient Israel, that included the notion that in order for the holy God to remain present with his people, the prospect of evil and corruptibility had to be dealt with in a decisive way (see Deut 7:1-6; Deut 20:16-18; see also Num 25; Judg 2:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the people of Canaan had rebelled against God and had become thoroughly wicked (see, e.g., Gen 34:1-2). At the time of Abraham, God declared that the sins of the Canaanites did not yet warrant their destruction (Gen 15:16). Now, several hundred years later, they did—they were committing horrible crimes against God and their fellow human beings, including idolatry, child sacrifice, adultery, incest, murder, and oppression (see Lev 18). These sins thoroughly defiled the land and its people (Lev 18:24-25). The holy God was exercising his justice against excessive wickedness.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to recognize that the war that Israel was authorized to wage was thus limited historically and theologically to that specific time and place and people. Medieval campaigns, such as the Crusades by European “Christians” against Middle Eastern “infidels,” or the more recent <em>jihads<\/em> of Islamic terrorism cannot be justified based on it. Jesus made it very clear that “God blesses those who work for peace” (Matt 5:9) and that “those who use the sword will die by the sword” (Matt 26:52). Jesus himself, as the Messiah, was expected to lead Israel in military victory over the Romans; instead, he gave up his life sacrificially to defeat the ultimate enemies of sin, death, and Satan. God has reserved for himself the right of judgment (Rom 12:19), and in the final judgment, he will pour out his holy wrath on human wickedness (see Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-10). Therefore, no one can now rightly claim that God has commanded that a particular group of people should be killed. No justification for genocide exists in the modern world.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1; 13:14-17; 15:16, 18-21; Deut 1:30; Deut 7:1-6, 16-26; 20:1-4, 10-18; 32:8-9; Judg 3:27-30; 1 Sam 7:7-11; 2 Chr 13:12-19; 20:20-24; Isa 13:1-5; Joel 3:1-16; Matt 5:9; 26:50-54; Rev 19:11-21; 20:7-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","summary_en":"Holy War The Israelites’ complete annihilation of their enemies poses a major ethical problem. What justification could Israel have had for invading, conquering, and destroying the land of Canaan and its peoples? From a human perspective, it appears that Israel’s aggressive campaigns to settle Canaan were illegal and immoral. Scripture, however, offers a couple of insights that, while not fully eliminating the difficulty in understanding this issue, provide some help. First, the war against t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"53":[{"id":42278,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69904,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97530,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125156,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22953,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Legion","title_en":"Legion","content_ro":"<h3>LEGION<\/h3>\n<p>A unit of the Roman army. In NT times the standard size of the legion was 6,000 men, to which some 120 cavalry were added.<\/p>\n<p>Because it represented a large body of men, the word “legion” came to be used symbolically for an indefinitely large number; this use occurs four times in the NT. In the story about the demoniac in the country of the Gerasenes, Jesus asked the man, “What is your name?” and the reply was, “My name is Legion, for we are many” (Mk 5:9, 15; Lk 8:30; cf. Mt 12:45; Lk 8:2, which speak of a number of demons possessing a single individual).<\/p>\n<p>Another use of the word is in Matthew 26:53, where at the time of Jesus’ arrest one of those with him drew his sword to defend his Master. Jesus forbade such action, saying, “Don’t you realize that I could ask my Father for thousands [legions] of angels to protect us, and he would send them instantly?” (<span>nlt<\/span>; see mg). Thus he spoke of the vast number of angels that could be summoned to his aid.<\/p>\n<p>The word “legion” is never used in the NT in its military sense, but either of the spiritual powers of evil that oppose men (cf. Eph 6:12) or of the spiritual powers that can be summoned to their aid (cf. Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEGION<\/h3>\n<p>A unit of the Roman army. In NT times the standard size of the legion was 6,000 men, to which some 120 cavalry were added.<\/p>\n<p>Because it represented a large body of men, the word “legion” came to be used symbolically for an indefinitely large number; this use occurs four times in the NT. In the story about the demoniac in the country of the Gerasenes, Jesus asked the man, “What is your name?” and the reply was, “My name is Legion, for we are many” (Mk 5:9, 15; Lk 8:30; cf. Mt 12:45; Lk 8:2, which speak of a number of demons possessing a single individual).<\/p>\n<p>Another use of the word is in Matthew 26:53, where at the time of Jesus’ arrest one of those with him drew his sword to defend his Master. Jesus forbade such action, saying, “Don’t you realize that I could ask my Father for thousands [legions] of angels to protect us, and he would send them instantly?” (<span>nlt<\/span>; see mg). Thus he spoke of the vast number of angels that could be summoned to his aid.<\/p>\n<p>The word “legion” is never used in the NT in its military sense, but either of the spiritual powers of evil that oppose men (cf. Eph 6:12) or of the spiritual powers that can be summoned to their aid (cf. Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEGION A unit of the Roman army. In NT times the standard size of the legion was 6,000 men, to which some 120 cavalry were added. Because it represented a large body of men, the word “legion” came to be used symbolically for an indefinitely large number; this use occurs four times in the NT. In the story about the demoniac in the country of the Gerasenes, Jesus asked the man, “What is your name?” and the reply was, “My name is Legion, for we are many” (Mk 5:9, 15; Lk 8:30; cf. Mt 12:45; Lk 8:...","summary_en":"LEGION A unit of the Roman army. In NT times the standard size of the legion was 6,000 men, to which some 120 cavalry were added. Because it represented a large body of men, the word “legion” came to be used symbolically for an indefinitely large number; this use occurs four times in the NT. In the story about the demoniac in the country of the Gerasenes, Jesus asked the man, “What is your name?” and the reply was, “My name is Legion, for we are many” (Mk 5:9, 15; Lk 8:30; cf. Mt 12:45; Lk 8:...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55064,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:53","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","summary_en":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82690,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:53","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","summary_en":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110316,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:53","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","summary_en":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137942,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:53","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:53<\/strong> <em>thousands<\/em> (literally <em>twelve legions<\/em>): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","summary_en":"26:53 thousands (literally twelve legions): Jesus used Roman military language (a legion consisted of approximately 6,000 soldiers) to describe the aid he could receive from God. Jesus was not a helpless victim; he permitted his own arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"54":[{"id":24839,"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":55065,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:54","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","summary_en":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82691,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:54","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","summary_en":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110317,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:54","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","summary_en":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137943,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:54","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:54","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:54<\/strong> For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","summary_en":"26:54 For Jesus to have resisted would have impeded the fulfillment of God’s saving work (see 16:21-23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"55":[{"id":19560,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55066,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:55","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:55","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","summary_en":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82692,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:55","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:55","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","summary_en":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110318,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:55","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:55","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","summary_en":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137944,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:55","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:55","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:55<\/strong> The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","summary_en":"26:55 The leaders’ clandestine behavior was driven by fear of the masses who revered Jesus (see 21:26, 46; 26:3-5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"56":[{"id":19597,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55067,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:56","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:56","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","summary_en":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82693,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:56","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:56","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","summary_en":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110319,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:56","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:56","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","summary_en":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137945,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:56","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:56","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:56<\/strong> It is not clear which of <em>the Scriptures<\/em> Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, <em>all the disciples deserted him<\/em> (Matt 26:31-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","summary_en":"26:56 It is not clear which of the Scriptures Jesus was alluding to—perhaps Isa 53, or perhaps the Old Testament theme of a suffering Messiah in general. • As Jesus had predicted earlier that evening, all the disciples deserted him (Matt 26:31-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"57":[{"id":42209,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42528,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69835,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70154,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97461,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97780,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125087,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125406,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5924,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Caiaphas","title_en":"Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","summary_en":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10307,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elder","title_en":"Elder","content_ro":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","summary_en":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24841,"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":34116,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Scribe","title_en":"Scribe","content_ro":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SCRIBE<\/h3>\n<p>Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPreexilicTimes\">Scribes in Preexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion of the term “scribe” and has no particular religious connotation. Scribes were employed to keep accounts or transcribe legal information (Jer 32:12), military data (2 Chr 26:11), other public documents (Jgs 8:14; Is 50:1), or personal correspondence (Jer 36:18). These secretaries were essential to royal administrations, and there is frequent mention of a chief scribe who functioned as a court recorder (1 Kgs 4:3; 2 Chr 24:11), adviser (2 Sm 8:16-17; 2 Kgs 18:18; 22:12; 1 Chr 27:32; Is 36:3), and financial overseer (2 Kgs 22:3-4). Secretaries or scribes were associated with the priesthood as well, serving as recorders for temple affairs (1 Chr 24:6; 2 Chr 34:13-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ScribesinPostexilicTimes\">Scribes in Postexilic Times<\/p>\n<p>With the restoration of Judaism under Ezra and Nehemiah, the term “scribe” begins to be associated more narrowly with those who gathered together, studied, and interpreted the Torah (Jewish law). They became, in essence, a separate profession of teachers (although unpaid), able to preserve accurately the law of Moses and interpret it to meet conditions in postexilic times. In this initial period, Ezra himself appears as the ideal “scribe who studied and taught the commands and laws of the <span>Lord<\/span> to Israel” (Ezr 7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). In Ecclesiasticus, the scribe is portrayed as one who, because of his diligent study of the Law, the Prophets, and Writings (Ecclus 38:24ff; 39:1), is able to penetrate the hidden meanings of texts (39:2-3) and thus is able to serve as judge and counsel for the affairs of the people and state (38:33; 39:4-8). Because of his invaluable place in a society governed by the Torah, the scribe is worthy of praise and veneration throughout succeeding generations (39:9). By the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the scribes were a fairly distinct class in Jewish society. They appear as such during the Maccabean wars, acting as a negotiating body with the rival Syrians (1 Macc 7:12). It is also significant that, from this time forward, the history of the scribe in Jewish life is closely linked with the rise of the Pharisees. Although there were apparently some scribes affiliated with the rival Sadducean party, the party of the Pharisees, with its absolute devotion to the law (including the oral law), became the primary religiopolitical affiliation for the scribes (see the close connection in the NT: Mt 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; Mk 7:5; Lk 6:7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrainingandStatus\">Training and Status<\/p>\n<p>The training of scribes initially occurred within priestly family-based guilds that guaranteed the regulation and perpetuation of this position (1 Chr 2:55). Later, scribal training in the law became open to members of all classes, with the eventual result, by Jesus’ time, of scribes from nonpriestly families being far more numerous and influential. Training in the law began at an early age under the personal supervision of a teacher (rabbi), who gave instructions in all matters pertaining to the law and its interpretation for present needs. Because the written law of Moses could not possibly speak directly to conditions in postexilic times, the oral interpretation and application of the written law to meet such current needs was a significant contribution by the scribes. Such oral law promulgated by them was regarded as equal to the written law and equally binding for those desiring to please God (see Mk 7:6-13). This important function, lying at the heart of Jewish life, accounts for the participation of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in order to make legal decisions in keeping with the law, obviously needed the presence of those most knowledgeable about the minutest details of the Torah and the principles governing its application to new circumstances. The scribes, consequently, were the only members outside the aristocratic high priests and elders to be represented in this Jewish supreme court (Mt 26:57; Mk 14:43, 53; Lk 22:66; Acts 23:9). Being the authoritative instructors of the law both within the temple (Lk 2:46) and within the various synagogues of Judea and Galilee (5:17), as well as prominent members of the Sanhedrin, the scribes were greatly respected within the Jewish community. They wore special robes (Mk 12:38) with memorial fringes at the bottom and phylacteries, or “prayer boxes,” hanging from the arms (Mt 23:5). Such attire made their presence obvious and occasioned the rising or bowing of the common people when they passed (Mk 12:38). They were addressed with respect as “rabbi” or “master” (Mt 23:7) and were given the place of honor at worship as well as at social affairs (Mt 23:2; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46). Indeed, the high regard the Jews held for their scribes is testified by the fact that such teachers of the law were buried alongside the tombs of the patriarchs and prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheScribesinJesusDay\">The Scribes in Jesus’ Day<\/p>\n<p>The scribes appear predominantly in the ministry of Jesus as those concerned with the circumspectness of legal observance. Luke refers to the scribes as “lawyers,” thereby describing their chief function as interpreters of the Jewish law in a way that communicated to his gentile audience. It is often found, therefore, that the scribes were critical members of Jesus’ audience, accusing him of violating the law on numerous occasions: in forgiving sins (Mt 9:1-3; Lk 5:17-26), in breaking their notion of Sabbath observance through work (Lk 6:1-2) and healing (vv 6-11), in not following their accepted ceremonial washings (Mk 7:2-5), and in ignoring their practice of fasting (Lk 5:33-39). Not surprisingly, they especially disapproved of Jesus’ practice of mingling with the unclean and outcasts of Jewish society (Mk 2:16-17; Lk 15:1-2). In a similar light, they are not unfrequently found presenting questions concerning the law for the purpose of tricking Jesus (Mk 7:5; 12:28, 35; Lk 11:53; Jn 8:3-4). In a similar fashion, they demanded that Jesus make his identity clear (Mt 12:38) and reveal the source of his authority to perform miracles (Mk 3:22; Lk 20:1-4). Although there is evidence that a minority of the scribes accepted Jesus (Mt 8:19; 13:52; Mk 12:32; Jn 3:1-2), their primary attitude toward Jesus was one of hostility. As previously suggested, this was partly due to Jesus’ differing expression of fidelity to the Mosaic law and his openness toward the outcasts. It was also partly due to the rising popularity of Jesus among the people, which posed a threat to their own authority (Mt 7:29) and to the safety of the city (Mt 21:15; Mk 11:18). Certainly, another major contributing factor of their opposition to Jesus was his exposure of their hypocrisy and corruption. In his rebukes of the scribes and the Pharisees, Jesus openly accused them of catering to public approval (Mt 23:5-7; Mk 12:38-39; Lk 11:43). While appearing to be outwardly correct and holy, they were inwardly corrupt (Mt 23:25-28; Lk 11:39-41). Jesus also attacked the principle of oral law taught by the scribes, which they demanded that the people follow. Jesus charged that the oral law was a “heavy burden” that the scribes themselves did not even bother to follow (Mt 23:2-4, 13-22; Lk 11:46). While emphasizing the minor points of the law, the scribes were also guilty of ignoring the weightier concerns of justice, mercy, and faith (Mt 23:23-24; Mk 12:40; Lk 11:42). Contrary to being the descendants of the prophets, as the scribes held themselves to be, the scribes (Jesus claimed) would have killed the prophets if they had lived in their day (Mt 23:29-36; Lk 20:9-19).<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising to find, therefore, the scribes anxious to get rid of Jesus (Mk 14:1; Lk 11:53). His more flexible interpretation of the law posed a clear threat to their position and authority within the community. The scribes joined forces with their normal opponents (the high priesthood) to engineer Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43). When Jesus appeared before them and the rest of the Sanhedrin, they worked with the other leaders to construct a case against him worthy of death (Mt 26:57-66). When taking Jesus before Herod, they stood by and shouted their accusations with the others (Lk 23:10). Finally, they participated with other members of the Sanhedrin in mocking Jesus on the cross, demanding that Jesus save himself by coming down from the cross (Mt 27:41-43). Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the scribes continued with the other elements of the Sanhedrin to oppose the early Christian church, and they brought about Stephen’s martyrdom (Acts 6:12-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Pharisees; Writer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","summary_en":"SCRIBE Reference in early OT times to those employed for their ability to transcribe information. After the exile, scribes were a class of scholars who taught, copied, and interpreted the Jewish law for the people. They appear in the Gospels primarily as opponents of Jesus. Scribes in Preexilic Times The ability to read and write was not widespread in ancient Israel, and professional secretaries were needed in the various aspects of public life. This appears to be the earliest biblical notion...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55068,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","summary_en":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55069,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","summary_en":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82694,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","summary_en":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82695,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","summary_en":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110320,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","summary_en":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110321,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","summary_en":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137946,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57–27:26<\/strong> The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","summary_en":"26:57–27:26 The Gospels record Jesus as undergoing five hearings: (1) an informal hearing before Annas (John 18:13-24); (2) a night hearing before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:59-66); (3) a morning hearing before the Sanhedrin (27:1-2); (4) a hearing before Herod Antipas (Luke 23:6-12); and (5) a two-stage trial before Pilate (Matt 27:11-31; see Luke 23:6-12). It all amounts to two trials, a Jewish trial and a Roman trial.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137947,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:57","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:57","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:57-68<\/strong> This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","summary_en":"26:57-68 This hearing might have been little more than an unofficial preliminary hearing designed to establish consensus on the terms of the charges. The Jewish leaders were under considerable pressure to keep this incident secret, lest their actions cause a riot (see 21:26, 46; 26:5, 55; John 11:45-53).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"58":[{"id":42163,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69789,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97415,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125041,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55070,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:58","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:58","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","summary_en":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82696,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:58","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:58","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","summary_en":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110322,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:58","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:58","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","summary_en":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137948,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:58","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:58","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:58<\/strong> <em>the high priest’s courtyard:<\/em> This location suggests an <em>ad hoc<\/em> meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","summary_en":"26:58 the high priest’s courtyard: This location suggests an ad hoc meeting of the Sanhedrin at the palace of the high priest (26:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"59":[{"id":55071,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:59","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","summary_en":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82697,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:59","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","summary_en":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110323,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:59","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","summary_en":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137949,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:59","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:59","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:59<\/strong> <em>were trying to find witnesses:<\/em> The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","summary_en":"26:59 were trying to find witnesses: The verb tense suggests an extended, perhaps desperate, attempt to find any testimony that could lead to a formal accusation (see Mark 14:55-56).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"60":[{"id":55072,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:60","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","summary_en":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82698,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:60","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","summary_en":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110324,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:60","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","summary_en":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137950,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:60","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:60<\/strong> <em>could not use anyone’s testimony:<\/em> The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until <em>two men came forward<\/em> (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","summary_en":"26:60 could not use anyone’s testimony: The evidence was too insubstantial or inconsistent to meet their goal of a death sentence until two men came forward (Deut 17:6; 19:15) with testimonies that did not conflict.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"61":[{"id":31614,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55073,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:61","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","summary_en":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82699,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:61","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","summary_en":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110325,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:61","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","summary_en":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137951,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:61","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:61","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:61<\/strong> The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","summary_en":"26:61 The charge is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate distortion of Jesus’ prediction of his death and resurrection (see John 2:19-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"62":[{"id":65105,"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":92731,"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":120357,"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":147983,"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}],"63":[{"id":5926,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Caiaphas","title_en":"Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","summary_en":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6323,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christ","title_en":"Christ","content_ro":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","summary_en":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8595,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Daniel","title_en":"Book of Daniel","content_ro":"<h3>DANIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the Major Prophets in the OT, characterized by vivid symbolism and reflecting heroic historical events during the Babylonian exile of the Jewish people. Because Daniel is not an easy book to understand, its interpretation requires careful study and reflection. Daniel himself wrote, when reflecting on the meaning of one of his visions, “I was greatly troubled by the vision and could not understand it” (Dn 8:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the old Jewish division of the OT, Daniel is part of the third section, called the Writings, along with such books as Psalms, Proverbs, and Job. It was not included in the second section of the OT, called the Prophets. Although portions of his book may be interpreted from a prophetic perspective, Daniel is never explicitly identified as a prophet. The book’s two major divisions are narratives about Daniel’s life (1–6) and Daniel’s visions (7–12).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Language<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content: Stories about Daniel (1–6)<\/p>\n<p>• Content: Daniel’s Visions (7–12)<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>In terms of having a known author, the book of Daniel is anonymous, as are many books coming from the ancient world. The existing text bears only a title, “Daniel,” identifying the key subject matter of the book: the man himself.<\/p>\n<p>The first six chapters of the book contain information about Daniel written in the third person; beginning in Daniel 7:2, however, the book purports to contain words written by Daniel in the first person. Although the traditional view within Judaism, later adopted by Christianity, was that Daniel wrote the entire book named for him, there is little confirming evidence. Jesus’ words about things “spoken of by the prophet Daniel” (Mt 24:15) do not clarify who wrote the whole book, since the words in question appear in the second half of the book of Daniel, explicitly identified as his words. Thus the problem of who wrote the first part remains.<\/p>\n<p>Whether or not Daniel wrote the entire book, he is definitely the key character. The only source of information about him is the book itself. Daniel was a Hebrew from Judah, probably of royal lineage, born late in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. As a young boy, he was taken from his homeland to Babylon (in what is now southern Iraq) around 605 <span>BC<\/span>. There, after three years of formal education in language and literature (Dn 1:4-5), he became an official in the royal household. The first six chapters tell of particular incidents in Daniel’s life but do not provide a comprehensive biography of his life and times.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s name means “God is my judge.” As a foreign resident in Babylon, he was given another name, Belteshazzar, which may have meant “may Bel (god) protect his life” in the Babylonian language.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Uncertainty about the authorship of the book of Daniel naturally contributes to uncertainty about the date of its writing. If Daniel was the author of the whole book, a date in the second half of the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> is likely. If he was not the author, a later date is possible. The conservative interpretation has usually been that the book was written in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>. An alternative position is that the book was written about 165 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Evidence exists to support both the early and late dates of Daniel. Those who argue for a late date and an author besides Daniel normally use two lines of argument, one historical and the other linguistic. But those espousing an earlier date have counterarguments, all of which are discussed below.<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Argument<\/h5>\n<p>According to the historical argument, the writer was thoroughly familiar with the history of Near Eastern imperial power from the sixth to the second centuries, but had an incomplete, erroneous view of the historical details in the second half of the sixth century, Daniel’s era. Such an imbalance in knowledge implies a late date of writing.<\/p>\n<p>The first part of the historical argument must be conceded by those holding a more conservative view. The book of Daniel does present a remarkable knowledge of Near Eastern history. The critical question is whether that knowledge was normal human knowledge, gained after the events, or special knowledge revealed to Daniel beforehand. That question is answered in different ways by different people, depending on their view of prophecy and other factors.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the historical argument is technically more complex. Was the writer’s knowledge of history in the late sixth century <span>BC<\/span> really erroneous? The most significant problem is that of the identity of Darius the Mede (Dn 5:30-31). The book of Daniel says that Darius the Mede conquered Babylon and was succeeded at a later date by Cyrus. External historical sources contain no reference to a Darius at the time, but show clearly that it was Cyrus who conquered Babylon. Advocates of a late date consider that strong evidence. Those who advocate an early date have no simple solution to the problem. One proposed solution is that Darius and Cyrus are two names for the same person. A basis for that hypothesis is that Daniel 6:28 can be translated: “Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, even [that is] the reign of Cyrus the Persian.” An analogy appears in the use of the names Pul and Tiglath-pileser in 1 Chronicles 5:26. In summary, the dating of Daniel on the basis of the writer’s historical knowledge is difficult, whether one suggests an early or late date.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Argument<\/h5>\n<p>The linguistic arguments for the date of Daniel are also complex, especially for a person not familiar with the original languages of the book (Hebrew and Aramaic). Advocates of a late date use three related arguments: (1) the Aramaic language of the book is typical of late Aramaic (second century <span>BC<\/span> and later); (2) the presence of Persian loan words is a further indication of the late date of the book’s Aramaic; and (3) the presence of Greek loan words in the Aramaic shows that the language must be dated after the time of Alexander the Great’s conquest of the Orient (c. 330 <span>BC<\/span>). For the advocates of a late date for the book’s composition, the last argument is most compelling. It would be impossible, they affirm, to find Greek loan words in Aramaic two centuries before Alexander’s time.<\/p>\n<p>Although the arguments are at first convincing, on closer examination they are less persuasive to those who hold the conservative view. Each of the three parts of the argument has been answered.<\/p>\n<p>1. Aramaic was in common use in the Near East from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>, being recognized as an official language in Assyria from the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. Ninety percent of the Aramaic words in Daniel were used in that older language, in both the Old and Imperial Aramaic dialects. The remaining 10 percent, known only in later texts in the light of present evidence, might indicate a late date, but they could equally be early uses of the words in question.<\/p>\n<li>2. The evidence of Persian loan words in Aramaic can function like a boomerang. It is true that later Aramaic has many Persian loan words (about 19 appear in Daniel), but one can give an alternative explanation for Persian loan words in Daniel at an early date. The story of Daniel is set, in part, in the context of life in a Persian-controlled court. The Persians used Aramaic in their administrative control of the empire, and their own language inevitably penetrated Aramaic. If one assumes an early date for the book of Daniel, then it was being written in precisely the period when Persian would be having its greatest influence on Aramaic.<\/li>\n<li>3. The evidence of Greek words in Daniel’s Aramaic (a total of three) is not altogether compelling. Greek (or “Ionian”) traders traveled in various parts of the Near East from the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> onward. Greek mercenaries fought for Near Eastern states in and after the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. In Daniel’s lifetime King Nebuchadnezzar is known to have employed Greek artisans in the city of Babylon. Thus, it is unnecessary to limit the possibilities of Greek penetration of the Aramaic language to the period after Alexander. The conqueror was by no means the first Greek to set foot in the Orient.<\/li>\n<h5>Conclusion<\/h5>\n<p>The historical and linguistic arguments for the date of Daniel are inconclusive for either an early or late date of writing. To a large extent, dating the book depends on other matters, such as authorship, intention, and the extent to which one takes a “prophetic” interpretation of portions of the book. To postulate that Daniel was the author is consistent with the evidence currently available. Further, evidence provided by some of the Daniel material from the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran does not support a late date for the book. All Daniel manuscripts and fragments are second-century <span>BC<\/span> copies, thus requiring an earlier date for the original. One manuscript, related paleographically to the large Isaiah Scroll, must have come originally from the same period—estimated to be several centuries before the Qumran copy of Isaiah. Other manuscripts from Qumran show that no OT canonical material was composed later than the Persian period. Thus, no manuscript evidence exists for a second-century <span>BC<\/span> date for Daniel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Language\">Language<\/p>\n<p>One of the most interesting features of the book of Daniel is not immediately evident to a reader of the English Bible. The book is bilingual. Daniel 1:1–2:4a and Daniel 8–12 are written in Hebrew, the language of the other OT books. The middle section (Dn 2:4b–7:28), however, is written in Aramaic, a different but related language. Various explanations have been offered for this phenomenon. Some have suggested that an original Aramaic book was expanded by a Hebrew writer, with additions to the original book at the beginning and the end. Others suggest that a portion of the original Hebrew book was lost, so the missing section was replaced from a surviving Aramaic translation. More complex and ingenious suggestions have also been made, but none has been commonly accepted.<\/p>\n<p>Another suggestion is possible. The book of Daniel (whatever date one prefers) may simply reflect the bilingual character of its cultural setting. (As a modern example, consider the many written materials in Canada that appear in both English and French.) Finally, one can regard the bilingual character as another of the mysterious aspects of the book that make its interpretation difficult.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The background of the book of Daniel can be examined from two perspectives. It may be viewed from the perspective of the Babylonian exile, of which Daniel was a part (early sixth century <span>BC<\/span>), or in the light of future historical events (second century <span>BC<\/span>), toward which the visions in the book’s second half seem to point.<\/p>\n<h5>The Babylonian Exile<\/h5>\n<p>Although Daniel himself was exiled about 605 <span>BC<\/span>, the major phase of the Babylonian exile began in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, following the defeat of the kingdom of Judah and the destruction of Jerusalem. The account extends through the reigns of Nebuchadnezzar (properly Nebuchadrezzar) and Belshazzar, culminating in the early years of the Persian king Cyrus, who took over the city of Babylon in 539 <span>BC<\/span>. For the Jews the exile was a time of hardship but also a time of renewed theological understanding. Both aspects are reflected in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Seleucid Period in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>Daniel’s visions in the latter half of the book appear to refer to the Seleucid period in Palestine, specifically the time when the Jews were ruled by Antiochus Epiphanes, a member of the Seleucid dynasty (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether the visions were prophetic anticipations of future events or reflections of contemporary culture, the Seleucid period is important to a full understanding of the book.<\/p>\n<p>Under Antiochus, Palestinian Jews experienced a time of considerable hardship. The ancient faith was severely undermined, the high priesthood in Jerusalem was sold to the highest bidder, and the temple was desecrated in several ways. Pressure was exerted on the Jews to adapt their lives and faith to Hellenistic (Greek-influenced) culture. Although some capitulated, others refused and steadfastly held firm to the old faith. A rebellion against the oppressive measures of Antiochus began in 168 <span>BC<\/span>. By 164 the rebels had largely succeeded in getting rid of the objectionable practices. But the Seleucid period was generally a bad time for faithful Jews, when all the forces of history seemed to work against the true faith. Part of the book of Daniel’s greatness lies in its theological understanding of history, which enabled men and women to continue living in faith through a time of terrible crisis.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural section of the OT called the Writings served a variety of purposes. The psalms, for example, were used primarily in Israel’s worship. The proverbs may have been part of Israel’s school curriculum. The book of Job addressed a specific human and theological problem.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Daniel is not so easy to determine, since it is essentially a story, a partial biography of Daniel. It is not strictly a prophetic book, nor is it history in the modern sense. Much of it is concerned with dreams and their interpretations.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, the word “history” provides a clue to its purpose. Daniel seeks to provide theological understanding of history. The first six chapters tell about Daniel and his companions, not merely to satisfy historical curiosity but to teach the reader. OT theology insisted that the God of Israel participated in human life and history. To read biblical history, therefore, is to discover God’s participation in human affairs and to learn how God and human beings relate to each other. In the opening chapters of Daniel one reads of events in the life of a man of remarkable faith, the kind of history from which one may learn how to live.<\/p>\n<p>The last six chapters focus on Daniel’s dreams. Although neither the dreams nor the interpretations are easy to understand, it is possible to see the theme of history emerging again. The emphasis in chapters 7–12 is not on history as a record of past events but on the meaning of history and the world’s future. In the biblical perspective, the movements of human societies in the present and future matter as much as past history. Though Daniel’s visions are dominated by nations and superpowers, they have a more basic theme: God’s power over human beings and nations. History often appears to be a conglomeration of chaos and human conflict. Yet God ultimately controls history and moves it toward a goal. In spite of ambiguous details at the end of the book, Daniel provides hope for people living in a time of crisis. Even if what is said about the “time of the end” cannot be understood now (Dn 12:9), the end of history is full of hope for those with faith in God (v 13). The purpose of the book of Daniel thus has to do with the meaning of history, both what can be learned from the past and what can be hoped for in the present and future.<\/p>\n<p>The book also contains specific theological statements on such matters as human faith, divine salvation, and the nature of revelation. One theological matter in Daniel deserves particular attention: the doctrine of resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The NT’s clear doctrine of resurrection followed by judgment is not a central theme in the OT. For the most part, the Hebrews’ faith was fixed on the realities of earthly life. Hope for life beyond the grave is hinted at in many texts but remains implicit. Only in the later writings of the OT, especially those of Ezekiel and Daniel, does a more explicit doctrine of resurrection develop.<\/p>\n\n<p>The focal point of that doctrine in the book of Daniel is 12:2: “Many of those whose bodies lie dead and buried will rise up, some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The doctrine of personal resurrection provides a basis for individual hope within an understanding of present and future history. Nations move against nations in apparent turmoil. God is believed to be in ultimate control, but what becomes of all the people who die while history is still in motion? The dead shall rise again, says Daniel, and in their resurrection bodies shall be judged according to their deeds. Some will be rewarded with everlasting life, but others will be condemned to shame.<\/p>\n<p>To the readers of the book of Daniel, the doctrine of resurrection provided hope in an otherwise bleak and hopeless world. It was a reminder that the actions of earthly life are important—they form the basis of future judgment. The world has a larger horizon of life beyond the body’s death. Ultimately, there will be justice, even though justice is rarely seen in the present existence. Evildoers may live without ever being punished. Yet beyond the death of the body lies a final judgment characterized by God’s justice.<\/p>\n<p>So the book of Daniel is about history and hope. Life must be lived now; for that, the book offers in the first six chapters the insight of Daniel’s experience. Life is lived in the context of war and international chaos; for that, chapters 7–12 depict God’s sovereignty and his purposes in history. Individual life moves toward death; for that, the writer speaks of resurrection and judgment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ContentStoriesaboutDaniel16\">Content: Stories about Daniel (1–6)<\/p>\n<h5>Daniel and His Companions (1:1-21)<\/h5>\n<p>Daniel and his companions—Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah—were exiled to Babylon some 19 years before the main exile following the destruction of Jerusalem. The four healthy young men, selected from among many Jewish exiles, were at the command of King Nebuchadnezzar assigned to a special three-year training program to make them court aides.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as the four Jewish youths entered Babylon’s high society, they faced a dietary problem. The king provided them with the best food and wine from the royal kitchens, but a Jew’s diet was restricted by the laws of God (see Dt 14). The four asked for a diet of vegetables and water, not to be fussy or ungrateful, but to remain faithful to their God. The story tells how the dietary situation worked out and sees them through their education and Daniel’s appointment as a royal counselor.<\/p>\n<p>The first episode thus focuses on a key issue faced by all Jewish exiles: How could one live in a foreign land, with foreign food and customs, yet remain faithful to God and his laws? Daniel provided a model. He was courageous enough not to compromise, but wise enough to seek a solution acceptable to all. His faithfulness was rewarded by God. By the end of the episode, Daniel is seen as a person with special wisdom and gifts from God. The rest of his life was marked by the exercise of those gifts.<\/p>\n<h5>Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream (2:1-49)<\/h5>\n<p>The king had a dream and, although he could not remember its substance, it weighed heavily on his mind. When his corps of professional interpreters could do nothing for him, he ordered that they be executed. The king’s order included Daniel and his companions, whose training qualified them as interpreters. Daniel obtained a stay of execution by offering to interpret the dream. After prayer, Daniel received from God both the substance of the dream and its interpretation, which he relayed to the king. The grateful Nebuchadnezzar promoted Daniel and his companions to important positions in Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Although the writer recorded both the king’s dream and Daniel’s interpretation, the problem for a modern reader is how to interpret the interpretation. The king saw in his dream a statue, with head of gold, chest and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron, and feet of part iron and part clay. The interpretation identified Nebuchadnezzar as the head of gold. His kingdom would be followed by three other kingdoms, each represented by the statue’s parts and substances. At that point modern interpretations begin to diverge.<\/p>\n<p>A common interpretation of the four sequential kingdoms is as follows: Chaldean Empire (gold), MedoPersian Empire (silver), Greece (brass), Rome (iron and clay). Others suggest an alternative interpretation: Chaldean Empire (gold), Media (silver), Persia (brass), Greece (iron and clay). To focus too much attention on identifying the four kingdoms can result in failure to see the chapter’s key feature. From the midst of those human kingdoms, “During the reigns of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed; no one will ever conquer it. It will shatter all these kingdoms into nothingness, but it will stand forever” (2:44, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Babylonian king’s dream anticipated the coming of a greater kingdom, that of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fiery Furnace (3:1-30)<\/h5>\n<p>The story continues, focusing on Daniel’s three friends and using their Babylonian names—Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. King Nebuchadnezzar constructed a massive gold statue, 90 feet (27.4 meters) high. At its dedication ceremony everyone was required to bow down and worship as a band began to play. The three young Hebrews, who refused to worship, were summoned before the king. Their continued firm refusal led to a sentence of execution, and they were thrown into a fiercely burning furnace. Remarkably, they did not burn, and a fourth being appeared with them in the furnace. As they emerged unharmed from the ordeal, the king acknowledged God’s power of salvation and rewarded them.<\/p>\n<p>The story illustrates a second dilemma of the Jews in exile. Faithfulness to God’s first commandment, “You shall have no other gods before me” (Dt 5:7), could lead to death. The three young men were faithful—not out of confidence that God would rescue them, but whether or not he chose to spare their lives (Dn 3:17-18). As it happened, God delivered them; they were tossed into the furnace bound, but they came out free men. The message was profound: certainly the Jews should believe in a God able to deliver from the flames of persecution, but they should believe and hold fast even if no deliverance could be seen beyond the trial.<\/p>\n<h5>Nebuchadnezzar’s Second Dream and Madness (4:1-37)<\/h5>\n<p>On two occasions Nebuchadnezzar had confessed faith in the living God: when Daniel had interpreted his dream of the statue (2:47), and on the release of Daniel’s three companions from the furnace (3:28). Nonetheless, the king’s faith was shallow. The story in chapter 4 recounts a lapse of faith that brought terrible consequences. After eight years, when those consequences had run their course, the king again acknowledged God (4:37).<\/p>\n<p>The entire story is presented in the form of a proclamation, written by Nebuchadnezzar and widely circulated after the events in the story had transpired. The king dreamed of a tall tree growing in a field to ever greater heights. A divine messenger ordered the tree cut down, with only a stump and roots left in the ground. The stump and roots then took the form of a man, but the man’s mind was replaced with that of an animal. For seven years that semihuman creature behaved like a beast.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel showed the king how the dream applied to the king himself. Nebuchadnezzar was the great tree that would be cut down; he would behave like a beast in the field for seven years. One year after the king had been told that interpretation, the judgment came. For seven years he behaved like an animal until his sanity returned.<\/p>\n<p>The moral of the king’s story is that his madness was no accident but rather divine judgment. His arrogant belief that he had the power of God led to heavy retribution (4:30). The king was probably afflicted with a rare and peculiar form of mental illness today called “boanthropy.” The true meaning of the story lies at a deeper level: to think that one is God, having absolute power and control of one’s own life, is madness. That kind of madness can be cured and overcome only with the realization that absolute power and authority belong to God alone.<\/p>\n<h5>Belshazzar’s Feast (5:1-31)<\/h5>\n<p>The scene shifts to the reign of a later king in Babylon, Belshazzar. The son of Nabonidus, he was probably co-regent with Nabonidus (555?–539 <span>BC<\/span>), with special authority in the region of Babylon. The theme of his story is similar to that of chapter 4. Belshazzar, in the course of an enormous feast, called for the sacred vessels captured from the temple in Jerusalem. With the sacred vessels the Babylonians toasted the local gods, a sacrilegious act that invited divine judgment. It came in the form of words written on the wall by a hand, which Daniel interpreted for the king as words of judgment (5:26-28). Although he praised Daniel for the interpretation, the king missed both the true meaning of the words and the lesson taught to Nebuchadnezzar, his predecessor (vv 18-22). Belshazzar was killed that very night when Darius the Mede entered the city and captured it. The theme continues remorselessly: human pride and arrogance do not pass unnoticed by the God of history, who controls and directs human events toward the fulfillment of his purpose.<\/p>\n<h5>The Den of Lions (6:1-28)<\/h5>\n<p>The theme of chapter 6 is similar to that of chapter 3, but with Daniel as the story’s central figure. He is portrayed as one unwilling to compromise, fully obedient to Darius as long as that was possible, but unwilling to disobey the law of God. Hence, Daniel knowingly disobeyed a royal decree that prohibited prayer to anyone other than the king himself. Although he was aware of the consequences, Daniel remained faithful to God. The immediate outcome, when his enemies reported him, was an order of execution—Daniel was thrown to the lions. He was delivered from the hungry cats, and the king, relieved of a terrible predicament, had the plotters punished.<\/p>\n<p>A double message emerges from the story. On the one hand, God’s servant must be faithful in prayer and worship, regardless of the outcome; God delivers, and in that case did deliver Daniel from disaster. On the other hand, the effect of Daniel’s faithfulness was that the king, who had ordered his subjects to worship him, learned about true worship (6:25-27). The effects of faithfulness, like ripples from a pebble tossed in a pool, spread far beyond the one who is faithful.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ContentDanielsVisions712\">Content: Daniel’s Visions (7–12)<\/p>\n<p>With the beginning of chapter 7 the chronological sequence of the book of Daniel changes; Daniel’s first vision goes back to the first year of Belshazzar (7:1), but subsequent visions take place as late as the reign of Cyrus, the Persian king (10:1). Chapters 7–12 emphasize the meaning of history and God’s sovereignty in history, expressed in the mysterious symbolism of dreams. The whole section can be divided as follows: (1) vision of four beasts (7:1-28); (2) vision of the ram and the goat (8:1-27); (3) Daniel’s prayer (9:1-27); (4) vision of the end times (10:1–12:13).<\/p>\n<p>The first vision again takes up the theme of four kingdoms, already seen in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (ch 2). In the second vision the focus is narrowed down to two kingdoms, Persia and Greece. Much of the final vision of the end times deals with events occurring during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. All the visions play on the same theme. Although human kingdoms may exert their might in a chaotic world, the sovereign God acts through history’s apparent chaos toward an ultimate goal of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>The primary interpretation of the visions can be perceived in past historical events, but a further messianic dimension can be seen in the light of the NT. That dimension is most evident in chapter 7. In the context of the four kingdoms, a divine court of judgment is established, presided over by the “Ancient of Days”—the almighty God (7:9). Then Daniel sees the arrival of “one like a son of man” (7:13). Though the phrase “son of man” was later perceived to be a messianic title, it did not technically have that meaning in the book of Daniel. Daniel 7:13 is a principal source for the title “Son of Man,” which Jesus commonly used to designate himself. His most significant use of that term was at his trial, where he directly associated his title with Daniel 7 (Mt 26:63-64).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Daniel (Person) #3; Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DANIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth book of the Major Prophets in the OT, characterized by vivid symbolism and reflecting heroic historical events during the Babylonian exile of the Jewish people. Because Daniel is not an easy book to understand, its interpretation requires careful study and reflection. Daniel himself wrote, when reflecting on the meaning of one of his visions, “I was greatly troubled by the vision and could not understand it” (Dn 8:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the old Jewish division of the OT, Daniel is part of the third section, called the Writings, along with such books as Psalms, Proverbs, and Job. It was not included in the second section of the OT, called the Prophets. Although portions of his book may be interpreted from a prophetic perspective, Daniel is never explicitly identified as a prophet. The book’s two major divisions are narratives about Daniel’s life (1–6) and Daniel’s visions (7–12).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Language<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content: Stories about Daniel (1–6)<\/p>\n<p>• Content: Daniel’s Visions (7–12)<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>In terms of having a known author, the book of Daniel is anonymous, as are many books coming from the ancient world. The existing text bears only a title, “Daniel,” identifying the key subject matter of the book: the man himself.<\/p>\n<p>The first six chapters of the book contain information about Daniel written in the third person; beginning in Daniel 7:2, however, the book purports to contain words written by Daniel in the first person. Although the traditional view within Judaism, later adopted by Christianity, was that Daniel wrote the entire book named for him, there is little confirming evidence. Jesus’ words about things “spoken of by the prophet Daniel” (Mt 24:15) do not clarify who wrote the whole book, since the words in question appear in the second half of the book of Daniel, explicitly identified as his words. Thus the problem of who wrote the first part remains.<\/p>\n<p>Whether or not Daniel wrote the entire book, he is definitely the key character. The only source of information about him is the book itself. Daniel was a Hebrew from Judah, probably of royal lineage, born late in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. As a young boy, he was taken from his homeland to Babylon (in what is now southern Iraq) around 605 <span>BC<\/span>. There, after three years of formal education in language and literature (Dn 1:4-5), he became an official in the royal household. The first six chapters tell of particular incidents in Daniel’s life but do not provide a comprehensive biography of his life and times.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s name means “God is my judge.” As a foreign resident in Babylon, he was given another name, Belteshazzar, which may have meant “may Bel (god) protect his life” in the Babylonian language.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Uncertainty about the authorship of the book of Daniel naturally contributes to uncertainty about the date of its writing. If Daniel was the author of the whole book, a date in the second half of the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> is likely. If he was not the author, a later date is possible. The conservative interpretation has usually been that the book was written in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>. An alternative position is that the book was written about 165 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Evidence exists to support both the early and late dates of Daniel. Those who argue for a late date and an author besides Daniel normally use two lines of argument, one historical and the other linguistic. But those espousing an earlier date have counterarguments, all of which are discussed below.<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Argument<\/h5>\n<p>According to the historical argument, the writer was thoroughly familiar with the history of Near Eastern imperial power from the sixth to the second centuries, but had an incomplete, erroneous view of the historical details in the second half of the sixth century, Daniel’s era. Such an imbalance in knowledge implies a late date of writing.<\/p>\n<p>The first part of the historical argument must be conceded by those holding a more conservative view. The book of Daniel does present a remarkable knowledge of Near Eastern history. The critical question is whether that knowledge was normal human knowledge, gained after the events, or special knowledge revealed to Daniel beforehand. That question is answered in different ways by different people, depending on their view of prophecy and other factors.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the historical argument is technically more complex. Was the writer’s knowledge of history in the late sixth century <span>BC<\/span> really erroneous? The most significant problem is that of the identity of Darius the Mede (Dn 5:30-31). The book of Daniel says that Darius the Mede conquered Babylon and was succeeded at a later date by Cyrus. External historical sources contain no reference to a Darius at the time, but show clearly that it was Cyrus who conquered Babylon. Advocates of a late date consider that strong evidence. Those who advocate an early date have no simple solution to the problem. One proposed solution is that Darius and Cyrus are two names for the same person. A basis for that hypothesis is that Daniel 6:28 can be translated: “Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, even [that is] the reign of Cyrus the Persian.” An analogy appears in the use of the names Pul and Tiglath-pileser in 1 Chronicles 5:26. In summary, the dating of Daniel on the basis of the writer’s historical knowledge is difficult, whether one suggests an early or late date.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Argument<\/h5>\n<p>The linguistic arguments for the date of Daniel are also complex, especially for a person not familiar with the original languages of the book (Hebrew and Aramaic). Advocates of a late date use three related arguments: (1) the Aramaic language of the book is typical of late Aramaic (second century <span>BC<\/span> and later); (2) the presence of Persian loan words is a further indication of the late date of the book’s Aramaic; and (3) the presence of Greek loan words in the Aramaic shows that the language must be dated after the time of Alexander the Great’s conquest of the Orient (c. 330 <span>BC<\/span>). For the advocates of a late date for the book’s composition, the last argument is most compelling. It would be impossible, they affirm, to find Greek loan words in Aramaic two centuries before Alexander’s time.<\/p>\n<p>Although the arguments are at first convincing, on closer examination they are less persuasive to those who hold the conservative view. Each of the three parts of the argument has been answered.<\/p>\n<p>1. Aramaic was in common use in the Near East from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>, being recognized as an official language in Assyria from the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. Ninety percent of the Aramaic words in Daniel were used in that older language, in both the Old and Imperial Aramaic dialects. The remaining 10 percent, known only in later texts in the light of present evidence, might indicate a late date, but they could equally be early uses of the words in question.<\/p>\n<li>2. The evidence of Persian loan words in Aramaic can function like a boomerang. It is true that later Aramaic has many Persian loan words (about 19 appear in Daniel), but one can give an alternative explanation for Persian loan words in Daniel at an early date. The story of Daniel is set, in part, in the context of life in a Persian-controlled court. The Persians used Aramaic in their administrative control of the empire, and their own language inevitably penetrated Aramaic. If one assumes an early date for the book of Daniel, then it was being written in precisely the period when Persian would be having its greatest influence on Aramaic.<\/li>\n<li>3. The evidence of Greek words in Daniel’s Aramaic (a total of three) is not altogether compelling. Greek (or “Ionian”) traders traveled in various parts of the Near East from the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> onward. Greek mercenaries fought for Near Eastern states in and after the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. In Daniel’s lifetime King Nebuchadnezzar is known to have employed Greek artisans in the city of Babylon. Thus, it is unnecessary to limit the possibilities of Greek penetration of the Aramaic language to the period after Alexander. The conqueror was by no means the first Greek to set foot in the Orient.<\/li>\n<h5>Conclusion<\/h5>\n<p>The historical and linguistic arguments for the date of Daniel are inconclusive for either an early or late date of writing. To a large extent, dating the book depends on other matters, such as authorship, intention, and the extent to which one takes a “prophetic” interpretation of portions of the book. To postulate that Daniel was the author is consistent with the evidence currently available. Further, evidence provided by some of the Daniel material from the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran does not support a late date for the book. All Daniel manuscripts and fragments are second-century <span>BC<\/span> copies, thus requiring an earlier date for the original. One manuscript, related paleographically to the large Isaiah Scroll, must have come originally from the same period—estimated to be several centuries before the Qumran copy of Isaiah. Other manuscripts from Qumran show that no OT canonical material was composed later than the Persian period. Thus, no manuscript evidence exists for a second-century <span>BC<\/span> date for Daniel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Language\">Language<\/p>\n<p>One of the most interesting features of the book of Daniel is not immediately evident to a reader of the English Bible. The book is bilingual. Daniel 1:1–2:4a and Daniel 8–12 are written in Hebrew, the language of the other OT books. The middle section (Dn 2:4b–7:28), however, is written in Aramaic, a different but related language. Various explanations have been offered for this phenomenon. Some have suggested that an original Aramaic book was expanded by a Hebrew writer, with additions to the original book at the beginning and the end. Others suggest that a portion of the original Hebrew book was lost, so the missing section was replaced from a surviving Aramaic translation. More complex and ingenious suggestions have also been made, but none has been commonly accepted.<\/p>\n<p>Another suggestion is possible. The book of Daniel (whatever date one prefers) may simply reflect the bilingual character of its cultural setting. (As a modern example, consider the many written materials in Canada that appear in both English and French.) Finally, one can regard the bilingual character as another of the mysterious aspects of the book that make its interpretation difficult.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The background of the book of Daniel can be examined from two perspectives. It may be viewed from the perspective of the Babylonian exile, of which Daniel was a part (early sixth century <span>BC<\/span>), or in the light of future historical events (second century <span>BC<\/span>), toward which the visions in the book’s second half seem to point.<\/p>\n<h5>The Babylonian Exile<\/h5>\n<p>Although Daniel himself was exiled about 605 <span>BC<\/span>, the major phase of the Babylonian exile began in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, following the defeat of the kingdom of Judah and the destruction of Jerusalem. The account extends through the reigns of Nebuchadnezzar (properly Nebuchadrezzar) and Belshazzar, culminating in the early years of the Persian king Cyrus, who took over the city of Babylon in 539 <span>BC<\/span>. For the Jews the exile was a time of hardship but also a time of renewed theological understanding. Both aspects are reflected in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Seleucid Period in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>Daniel’s visions in the latter half of the book appear to refer to the Seleucid period in Palestine, specifically the time when the Jews were ruled by Antiochus Epiphanes, a member of the Seleucid dynasty (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether the visions were prophetic anticipations of future events or reflections of contemporary culture, the Seleucid period is important to a full understanding of the book.<\/p>\n<p>Under Antiochus, Palestinian Jews experienced a time of considerable hardship. The ancient faith was severely undermined, the high priesthood in Jerusalem was sold to the highest bidder, and the temple was desecrated in several ways. Pressure was exerted on the Jews to adapt their lives and faith to Hellenistic (Greek-influenced) culture. Although some capitulated, others refused and steadfastly held firm to the old faith. A rebellion against the oppressive measures of Antiochus began in 168 <span>BC<\/span>. By 164 the rebels had largely succeeded in getting rid of the objectionable practices. But the Seleucid period was generally a bad time for faithful Jews, when all the forces of history seemed to work against the true faith. Part of the book of Daniel’s greatness lies in its theological understanding of history, which enabled men and women to continue living in faith through a time of terrible crisis.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural section of the OT called the Writings served a variety of purposes. The psalms, for example, were used primarily in Israel’s worship. The proverbs may have been part of Israel’s school curriculum. The book of Job addressed a specific human and theological problem.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Daniel is not so easy to determine, since it is essentially a story, a partial biography of Daniel. It is not strictly a prophetic book, nor is it history in the modern sense. Much of it is concerned with dreams and their interpretations.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, the word “history” provides a clue to its purpose. Daniel seeks to provide theological understanding of history. The first six chapters tell about Daniel and his companions, not merely to satisfy historical curiosity but to teach the reader. OT theology insisted that the God of Israel participated in human life and history. To read biblical history, therefore, is to discover God’s participation in human affairs and to learn how God and human beings relate to each other. In the opening chapters of Daniel one reads of events in the life of a man of remarkable faith, the kind of history from which one may learn how to live.<\/p>\n<p>The last six chapters focus on Daniel’s dreams. Although neither the dreams nor the interpretations are easy to understand, it is possible to see the theme of history emerging again. The emphasis in chapters 7–12 is not on history as a record of past events but on the meaning of history and the world’s future. In the biblical perspective, the movements of human societies in the present and future matter as much as past history. Though Daniel’s visions are dominated by nations and superpowers, they have a more basic theme: God’s power over human beings and nations. History often appears to be a conglomeration of chaos and human conflict. Yet God ultimately controls history and moves it toward a goal. In spite of ambiguous details at the end of the book, Daniel provides hope for people living in a time of crisis. Even if what is said about the “time of the end” cannot be understood now (Dn 12:9), the end of history is full of hope for those with faith in God (v 13). The purpose of the book of Daniel thus has to do with the meaning of history, both what can be learned from the past and what can be hoped for in the present and future.<\/p>\n<p>The book also contains specific theological statements on such matters as human faith, divine salvation, and the nature of revelation. One theological matter in Daniel deserves particular attention: the doctrine of resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The NT’s clear doctrine of resurrection followed by judgment is not a central theme in the OT. For the most part, the Hebrews’ faith was fixed on the realities of earthly life. Hope for life beyond the grave is hinted at in many texts but remains implicit. Only in the later writings of the OT, especially those of Ezekiel and Daniel, does a more explicit doctrine of resurrection develop.<\/p>\n\n<p>The focal point of that doctrine in the book of Daniel is 12:2: “Many of those whose bodies lie dead and buried will rise up, some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The doctrine of personal resurrection provides a basis for individual hope within an understanding of present and future history. Nations move against nations in apparent turmoil. God is believed to be in ultimate control, but what becomes of all the people who die while history is still in motion? The dead shall rise again, says Daniel, and in their resurrection bodies shall be judged according to their deeds. Some will be rewarded with everlasting life, but others will be condemned to shame.<\/p>\n<p>To the readers of the book of Daniel, the doctrine of resurrection provided hope in an otherwise bleak and hopeless world. It was a reminder that the actions of earthly life are important—they form the basis of future judgment. The world has a larger horizon of life beyond the body’s death. Ultimately, there will be justice, even though justice is rarely seen in the present existence. Evildoers may live without ever being punished. Yet beyond the death of the body lies a final judgment characterized by God’s justice.<\/p>\n<p>So the book of Daniel is about history and hope. Life must be lived now; for that, the book offers in the first six chapters the insight of Daniel’s experience. Life is lived in the context of war and international chaos; for that, chapters 7–12 depict God’s sovereignty and his purposes in history. Individual life moves toward death; for that, the writer speaks of resurrection and judgment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ContentStoriesaboutDaniel16\">Content: Stories about Daniel (1–6)<\/p>\n<h5>Daniel and His Companions (1:1-21)<\/h5>\n<p>Daniel and his companions—Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah—were exiled to Babylon some 19 years before the main exile following the destruction of Jerusalem. The four healthy young men, selected from among many Jewish exiles, were at the command of King Nebuchadnezzar assigned to a special three-year training program to make them court aides.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as the four Jewish youths entered Babylon’s high society, they faced a dietary problem. The king provided them with the best food and wine from the royal kitchens, but a Jew’s diet was restricted by the laws of God (see Dt 14). The four asked for a diet of vegetables and water, not to be fussy or ungrateful, but to remain faithful to their God. The story tells how the dietary situation worked out and sees them through their education and Daniel’s appointment as a royal counselor.<\/p>\n<p>The first episode thus focuses on a key issue faced by all Jewish exiles: How could one live in a foreign land, with foreign food and customs, yet remain faithful to God and his laws? Daniel provided a model. He was courageous enough not to compromise, but wise enough to seek a solution acceptable to all. His faithfulness was rewarded by God. By the end of the episode, Daniel is seen as a person with special wisdom and gifts from God. The rest of his life was marked by the exercise of those gifts.<\/p>\n<h5>Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream (2:1-49)<\/h5>\n<p>The king had a dream and, although he could not remember its substance, it weighed heavily on his mind. When his corps of professional interpreters could do nothing for him, he ordered that they be executed. The king’s order included Daniel and his companions, whose training qualified them as interpreters. Daniel obtained a stay of execution by offering to interpret the dream. After prayer, Daniel received from God both the substance of the dream and its interpretation, which he relayed to the king. The grateful Nebuchadnezzar promoted Daniel and his companions to important positions in Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Although the writer recorded both the king’s dream and Daniel’s interpretation, the problem for a modern reader is how to interpret the interpretation. The king saw in his dream a statue, with head of gold, chest and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron, and feet of part iron and part clay. The interpretation identified Nebuchadnezzar as the head of gold. His kingdom would be followed by three other kingdoms, each represented by the statue’s parts and substances. At that point modern interpretations begin to diverge.<\/p>\n<p>A common interpretation of the four sequential kingdoms is as follows: Chaldean Empire (gold), MedoPersian Empire (silver), Greece (brass), Rome (iron and clay). Others suggest an alternative interpretation: Chaldean Empire (gold), Media (silver), Persia (brass), Greece (iron and clay). To focus too much attention on identifying the four kingdoms can result in failure to see the chapter’s key feature. From the midst of those human kingdoms, “During the reigns of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed; no one will ever conquer it. It will shatter all these kingdoms into nothingness, but it will stand forever” (2:44, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Babylonian king’s dream anticipated the coming of a greater kingdom, that of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fiery Furnace (3:1-30)<\/h5>\n<p>The story continues, focusing on Daniel’s three friends and using their Babylonian names—Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. King Nebuchadnezzar constructed a massive gold statue, 90 feet (27.4 meters) high. At its dedication ceremony everyone was required to bow down and worship as a band began to play. The three young Hebrews, who refused to worship, were summoned before the king. Their continued firm refusal led to a sentence of execution, and they were thrown into a fiercely burning furnace. Remarkably, they did not burn, and a fourth being appeared with them in the furnace. As they emerged unharmed from the ordeal, the king acknowledged God’s power of salvation and rewarded them.<\/p>\n<p>The story illustrates a second dilemma of the Jews in exile. Faithfulness to God’s first commandment, “You shall have no other gods before me” (Dt 5:7), could lead to death. The three young men were faithful—not out of confidence that God would rescue them, but whether or not he chose to spare their lives (Dn 3:17-18). As it happened, God delivered them; they were tossed into the furnace bound, but they came out free men. The message was profound: certainly the Jews should believe in a God able to deliver from the flames of persecution, but they should believe and hold fast even if no deliverance could be seen beyond the trial.<\/p>\n<h5>Nebuchadnezzar’s Second Dream and Madness (4:1-37)<\/h5>\n<p>On two occasions Nebuchadnezzar had confessed faith in the living God: when Daniel had interpreted his dream of the statue (2:47), and on the release of Daniel’s three companions from the furnace (3:28). Nonetheless, the king’s faith was shallow. The story in chapter 4 recounts a lapse of faith that brought terrible consequences. After eight years, when those consequences had run their course, the king again acknowledged God (4:37).<\/p>\n<p>The entire story is presented in the form of a proclamation, written by Nebuchadnezzar and widely circulated after the events in the story had transpired. The king dreamed of a tall tree growing in a field to ever greater heights. A divine messenger ordered the tree cut down, with only a stump and roots left in the ground. The stump and roots then took the form of a man, but the man’s mind was replaced with that of an animal. For seven years that semihuman creature behaved like a beast.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel showed the king how the dream applied to the king himself. Nebuchadnezzar was the great tree that would be cut down; he would behave like a beast in the field for seven years. One year after the king had been told that interpretation, the judgment came. For seven years he behaved like an animal until his sanity returned.<\/p>\n<p>The moral of the king’s story is that his madness was no accident but rather divine judgment. His arrogant belief that he had the power of God led to heavy retribution (4:30). The king was probably afflicted with a rare and peculiar form of mental illness today called “boanthropy.” The true meaning of the story lies at a deeper level: to think that one is God, having absolute power and control of one’s own life, is madness. That kind of madness can be cured and overcome only with the realization that absolute power and authority belong to God alone.<\/p>\n<h5>Belshazzar’s Feast (5:1-31)<\/h5>\n<p>The scene shifts to the reign of a later king in Babylon, Belshazzar. The son of Nabonidus, he was probably co-regent with Nabonidus (555?–539 <span>BC<\/span>), with special authority in the region of Babylon. The theme of his story is similar to that of chapter 4. Belshazzar, in the course of an enormous feast, called for the sacred vessels captured from the temple in Jerusalem. With the sacred vessels the Babylonians toasted the local gods, a sacrilegious act that invited divine judgment. It came in the form of words written on the wall by a hand, which Daniel interpreted for the king as words of judgment (5:26-28). Although he praised Daniel for the interpretation, the king missed both the true meaning of the words and the lesson taught to Nebuchadnezzar, his predecessor (vv 18-22). Belshazzar was killed that very night when Darius the Mede entered the city and captured it. The theme continues remorselessly: human pride and arrogance do not pass unnoticed by the God of history, who controls and directs human events toward the fulfillment of his purpose.<\/p>\n<h5>The Den of Lions (6:1-28)<\/h5>\n<p>The theme of chapter 6 is similar to that of chapter 3, but with Daniel as the story’s central figure. He is portrayed as one unwilling to compromise, fully obedient to Darius as long as that was possible, but unwilling to disobey the law of God. Hence, Daniel knowingly disobeyed a royal decree that prohibited prayer to anyone other than the king himself. Although he was aware of the consequences, Daniel remained faithful to God. The immediate outcome, when his enemies reported him, was an order of execution—Daniel was thrown to the lions. He was delivered from the hungry cats, and the king, relieved of a terrible predicament, had the plotters punished.<\/p>\n<p>A double message emerges from the story. On the one hand, God’s servant must be faithful in prayer and worship, regardless of the outcome; God delivers, and in that case did deliver Daniel from disaster. On the other hand, the effect of Daniel’s faithfulness was that the king, who had ordered his subjects to worship him, learned about true worship (6:25-27). The effects of faithfulness, like ripples from a pebble tossed in a pool, spread far beyond the one who is faithful.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ContentDanielsVisions712\">Content: Daniel’s Visions (7–12)<\/p>\n<p>With the beginning of chapter 7 the chronological sequence of the book of Daniel changes; Daniel’s first vision goes back to the first year of Belshazzar (7:1), but subsequent visions take place as late as the reign of Cyrus, the Persian king (10:1). Chapters 7–12 emphasize the meaning of history and God’s sovereignty in history, expressed in the mysterious symbolism of dreams. The whole section can be divided as follows: (1) vision of four beasts (7:1-28); (2) vision of the ram and the goat (8:1-27); (3) Daniel’s prayer (9:1-27); (4) vision of the end times (10:1–12:13).<\/p>\n<p>The first vision again takes up the theme of four kingdoms, already seen in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (ch 2). In the second vision the focus is narrowed down to two kingdoms, Persia and Greece. Much of the final vision of the end times deals with events occurring during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. All the visions play on the same theme. Although human kingdoms may exert their might in a chaotic world, the sovereign God acts through history’s apparent chaos toward an ultimate goal of salvation.<\/p>\n<p>The primary interpretation of the visions can be perceived in past historical events, but a further messianic dimension can be seen in the light of the NT. That dimension is most evident in chapter 7. In the context of the four kingdoms, a divine court of judgment is established, presided over by the “Ancient of Days”—the almighty God (7:9). Then Daniel sees the arrival of “one like a son of man” (7:13). Though the phrase “son of man” was later perceived to be a messianic title, it did not technically have that meaning in the book of Daniel. Daniel 7:13 is a principal source for the title “Son of Man,” which Jesus commonly used to designate himself. His most significant use of that term was at his trial, where he directly associated his title with Daniel 7 (Mt 26:63-64).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Daniel (Person) #3; Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DANIEL, Book of Fourth book of the Major Prophets in the OT, characterized by vivid symbolism and reflecting heroic historical events during the Babylonian exile of the Jewish people. Because Daniel is not an easy book to understand, its interpretation requires careful study and reflection. Daniel himself wrote, when reflecting on the meaning of one of his visions, “I was greatly troubled by the vision and could not understand it” (Dn 8:27, nlt). In the old Jewish division of the OT, Daniel i...","summary_en":"DANIEL, Book of Fourth book of the Major Prophets in the OT, characterized by vivid symbolism and reflecting heroic historical events during the Babylonian exile of the Jewish people. Because Daniel is not an easy book to understand, its interpretation requires careful study and reflection. Daniel himself wrote, when reflecting on the meaning of one of his visions, “I was greatly troubled by the vision and could not understand it” (Dn 8:27, nlt). In the old Jewish division of the OT, Daniel i...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24857,"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":28022,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Oath","title_en":"Oath","content_ro":"<h3>OATH<\/h3>\n<p>Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sebu’a<\/span><em>.<\/em> The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The former term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “oath,” properly means “curse.” At times the two terms are used together (Nm 5:21; Neh 10:29; Dn 9:11). Any breach of one’s undertaking affirmed by an oath would be attended by a curse. The Lord affirmed that he had established a covenant and a curse with Israel—that is, a breach of covenant would be followed by a curse (Dt 29:14ff.).<\/p>\n<p>An oath was taken to confirm an agreement or, in a political situation, to confirm a treaty. Both in Israel and among its neighbors, God (or the gods) would act as the guarantor(s) of the agreement and his name (or their names) was invoked for this purpose. When Jacob and Laban made an agreement, they erected a heap of stones as a witness (Gn 31:53). If either party transgressed the terms, it was a heinous sin. For this reason one of the Ten Commandments dealt with empty affirmations: “Do not misuse the name of the <span>Lord<\/span> your God. The <span>Lord<\/span> will not let you go unpunished if you misuse his name” (Ex 20:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people of Israel were forbidden to swear their oaths by false gods (Jer 12:16; Am 8:14). To breach an international treaty, where the oath was taken in the Lord’s name, merited death (Ez 17:16-17). It was one of the complaints of Hosea that the people of his day swore falsely when they made a covenant (Hos 10:4). Judgment would attend such wanton disregard of the solemnity of an oath. Certain civil situations in Israel called for an oath (Ex 22:10-11; Lv 5:1; 6:3; Nm 5:11-28). This practice provided a pattern for the Israelite covenantal oath of allegiance between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>Christ taught that oaths were binding (Mt 5:33). In the kingdom of God oaths would become unnecessary (vv 34-37). At his trial before Caiaphas, Jesus heard an imprecatory oath from the high priest (26:63-65), and Paul swore by an oath on occasion (2 Cor 1:23; Gal 1:20). God himself was bound by his own oath (Heb 6:13-18) to keep his promise to the patriarchs (Gn 50:24; Pss 89:19-37, 49; 110:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OATH<\/h3>\n<p>Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sebu’a<\/span><em>.<\/em> The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The former term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “oath,” properly means “curse.” At times the two terms are used together (Nm 5:21; Neh 10:29; Dn 9:11). Any breach of one’s undertaking affirmed by an oath would be attended by a curse. The Lord affirmed that he had established a covenant and a curse with Israel—that is, a breach of covenant would be followed by a curse (Dt 29:14ff.).<\/p>\n<p>An oath was taken to confirm an agreement or, in a political situation, to confirm a treaty. Both in Israel and among its neighbors, God (or the gods) would act as the guarantor(s) of the agreement and his name (or their names) was invoked for this purpose. When Jacob and Laban made an agreement, they erected a heap of stones as a witness (Gn 31:53). If either party transgressed the terms, it was a heinous sin. For this reason one of the Ten Commandments dealt with empty affirmations: “Do not misuse the name of the <span>Lord<\/span> your God. The <span>Lord<\/span> will not let you go unpunished if you misuse his name” (Ex 20:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people of Israel were forbidden to swear their oaths by false gods (Jer 12:16; Am 8:14). To breach an international treaty, where the oath was taken in the Lord’s name, merited death (Ez 17:16-17). It was one of the complaints of Hosea that the people of his day swore falsely when they made a covenant (Hos 10:4). Judgment would attend such wanton disregard of the solemnity of an oath. Certain civil situations in Israel called for an oath (Ex 22:10-11; Lv 5:1; 6:3; Nm 5:11-28). This practice provided a pattern for the Israelite covenantal oath of allegiance between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>Christ taught that oaths were binding (Mt 5:33). In the kingdom of God oaths would become unnecessary (vv 34-37). At his trial before Caiaphas, Jesus heard an imprecatory oath from the high priest (26:63-65), and Paul swore by an oath on occasion (2 Cor 1:23; Gal 1:20). God himself was bound by his own oath (Heb 6:13-18) to keep his promise to the patriarchs (Gn 50:24; Pss 89:19-37, 49; 110:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OATH Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: ‘ala and sebu’a. The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The f...","summary_en":"OATH Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: ‘ala and sebu’a. The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The f...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55074,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:63","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","summary_en":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82700,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:63","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","summary_en":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110326,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:63","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","summary_en":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137952,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:63","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:63<\/strong> <em>if you are the Messiah:<\/em> This question from <em>the high priest<\/em> was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","summary_en":"26:63 if you are the Messiah: This question from the high priest was prompted by Zech 6:12, which had predicted that the Messiah would rebuild the Temple (cp. Matt 26:61).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65435,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93061,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120687,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148313,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"64":[{"id":31005,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Power","title_en":"Power","content_ro":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","summary_en":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35839,"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":55075,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:64","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","summary_en":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82701,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:64","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","summary_en":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110327,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:64","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","summary_en":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137953,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:64","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:64","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:64<\/strong> <em>You have said it:<\/em> This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Mark 14:62). • <em>you will see:<\/em> By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • <em>seated in the place of power at God’s right hand:<\/em> Literally <em>seated at the right hand of the power;<\/em> see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression <em>coming on the clouds of heaven<\/em> could refer either to the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 or to Jesus’ second coming at the end of history.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","summary_en":"26:64 You have said it: This purposefully enigmatic response is essentially an affirmative answer (see 26:25; 27:11); Mark has “I Am” (Mark 14:62). • you will see: By quoting Dan 7:13, Jesus affirmed that he was the Son of Man who would be vindicated and exalted by God. • seated in the place of power at God’s right hand: Literally seated at the right hand of the power; see Ps 110:1. Jews were reluctant to name God directly (see study note on Matt 5:4). • The expression coming on the clouds of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60742,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64956,"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":88368,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92582,"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":115994,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120208,"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":143620,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cloud and Fire","title_en":"The Cloud and Fire","content_ro":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cloud and Fire<\/h3>\n<p>When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the <span>Lord<\/span> went ahead of them” (Exod 13:21). When the pillar settled over the Tabernacle and the camp of Israel, it represented the Lord’s presence and protection. The cloud and fire also provided divine guidance by indicating when the Israelites should move (Exod 40:36-38; Num 9:17-23). When the pillar was stationary, Israel stayed where they were. When it lifted and moved on, the Israelites broke camp and followed. They camped in different places for varying amounts of time, sometimes briefly and sometimes for a longer period. Israel thus “camped or traveled at the <span>Lord<\/span>’s command” (Num 9:23). The pillar of cloud and fire was like a divine banner flying over the tribes on the march (cp. 10:14, 18, 22, 25).<\/p>\n<p>The pillar regularly appeared as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (9:15-16; Exod 13:21). In the Bible, both fire and clouds often indicate the presence and glory of God (e.g., Exod 19:16-18; 24:15-18; Matt 17:5; 24:30; Acts 1:9; cp. Ps 18:8-13). The cloud and fire imagery indicated that God’s presence and glory moved with Israel through the wilderness. This special manifestation of God (a <em>theophany<\/em>) stayed with them “throughout all their journeys” while they were in the wilderness (Exod 40:38; see also Exod 13:22). Sometimes, “the cloud covered the Tabernacle, and the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> filled the Tabernacle,” so that “Moses could no longer enter the Tabernacle” (Exod 40:34-35). On other occasions, the cloud descended and hovered near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, indicating that the Lord was speaking with Moses “face to face” (Exod 33:7-11; cp. Num 11:25; 12:5; Deut 31:15). The pillar of cloud and fire was a constant, reassuring reminder of the Lord’s presence. We are not given any specific description of the fire and the cloud other than that it was shaped like a pillar; regardless, it was a powerful symbol of God’s special care for Israel (see Neh 9:19-21; cp. Pss 46:1; 139; John 1:14; Rom 8:31-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 13:20-22; 14:19-24; 16:10; 19:16-18; 24:15-18; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Lev 16:2; Num 9:15-23; 10:11-12, 34; 11:25; 12:5, 10; 14:14; 16:42; Deut 31:15; 1 Kgs 8:11; 2 Chr 5:14; Neh 9:19-21; Pss 78:14; 99:7; 104:3; Ezek 1:4-5; 10:3; Matt 17:5; 24:30; 26:64; Luke 9:34-35; Acts 1:9; 1 Cor 10:2; 1 Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7; 14:14-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","summary_en":"The Cloud and Fire When Israel was in the wilderness, God led the nation with a pillar of cloud and fire. The pillar joined the Israelites right after the first Passover, immediately after Israel left Egypt (Exod 13:20-22). The pillar served a variety of functions. When the Egyptians pursued the Israelites, the cloud moved behind the people of Israel and prevented an Egyptian advance (Exod 14:19-20). Through the rest of Israel’s travels, it was a visible indication that “the Lord went ahead o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147834,"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}],"65":[{"id":33904,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sanhedrin*","title_en":"Sanhedrin*","content_ro":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","summary_en":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55076,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:65","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:65","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","summary_en":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82702,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:65","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:65","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","summary_en":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110328,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:65","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:65","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","summary_en":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137954,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:65","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:65","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:65<\/strong> <em>Blasphemy!<\/em> Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","summary_en":"26:65 Blasphemy! Caiaphas evidently understood Jesus’ claim to be the exalted Son of Man as a blasphemy against God’s majesty. The Son of Man (Dan 7:13-14) was closely associated with this majesty.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"67":[{"id":28944,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39696,"type":"chart","type_label":"Diagramă","type_icon":"📊","type_color":"#3b82f6","title_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","title_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments","content_ro":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","content_en":"<h3>Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments<\/h3>\n<p>For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies.<\/p>\n<table>\n <tr>\n <td><p class=\"td\"\/><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>Old Testament Prophecies<\/strong><\/p><\/td>\n <td><p><strong>New Testament Fulfillment<\/strong><\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Micah 5:2<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 2:1-6<\/p><p>Luke 2:1-20<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 7:14<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 1:18-25<\/p><p>Luke 1:26-38<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 7:40<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 4. Messiah was to enter Jerusalem in triumph<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Zechariah 9:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 21:1-9<\/p><p>John 12:12-16<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 5. Messiah was to be rejected by his own people<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:1, 3<\/p><p>Psalm 118:22<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:3-4<\/p><p>John 12:37-43<\/p><p>Acts 4:1-12<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 6. Messiah was to be betrayed by one of his followers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 41:9<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:14-16, 47-50<\/p><p>Luke 22:19-23<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 7. Messiah was to be tried and condemned<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Luke 23:1-25<\/p><p>Matthew 27:1-2<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 8. Messiah was to be silent before his accusers<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:7<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:12-14<\/p><p>Mark 15:3-4<\/p><p>Luke 23:8-10<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p> 9. Messiah was to be struck and spat on by his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 50:6<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 26:67; 27:30<\/p><p>Mark 14:65<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>10. Messiah was to be mocked and insulted<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:7-8<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:39-44<\/p><p>Luke 23:11, 35<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>11. Messiah was to die by crucifixion<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:14, 16-17<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:31<\/p><p>Mark 15:20, 25<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>12. Messiah was to suffer with criminals and pray for his enemies<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:38<\/p><p>Mark 15:27, 28<\/p><p>Luke 23:32-34<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>13. Messiah was to be given vinegar<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 69:21<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:34<\/p><p>John 19:28-30<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>14. Others were to cast lots for Messiah’s garments<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 22:18<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 27:35<\/p><p>John 19:23-24<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>15. Messiah’s bones were not to be broken<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Exodus 12:46<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 19:31-36<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>16. Messiah was to die as a sacrifice for sin<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Isaiah 53:5-6, 8, 10-12<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>John 1:29; 11:49-52<\/p><p>Acts 10:43; 13:38, 39<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>17. Messiah was to be raised from the dead<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 16:10<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Matthew 28:1-10<\/p><p>Acts 2:22-32<\/p><\/td><\/tr>\n <tr>\n <td><p>18. Messiah is now at God’s right hand<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Psalm 110:1<\/p><\/td>\n <td><p>Mark 16:19<\/p><p>Luke 24:50-51<\/p><\/td><\/tr><\/table>","summary_ro":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","summary_en":"Messianic Prophecies and Fulfillments For the Gospel writers, one of the main reasons for believing in Jesus was the way his life fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah. Following is a list of some of the main prophecies. Old Testament Prophecies New Testament Fulfillment 1. Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1-6Luke 2:1-20 2. Messiah was to be born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25Luke 1:26-38 3. Messiah was to be a prophet like Moses Deuterono...","source":"Charts\/Charts.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55077,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:67","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","summary_en":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82703,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:67","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","summary_en":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110329,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:67","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","summary_en":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137955,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:67","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:67","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:67-68<\/strong> Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","summary_en":"26:67-68 Such abuse fulfills Isa 50:6; 53:4-9 and Jesus’ own predictions (Matt 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2; see also Mark 14:65).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"69":[{"id":42129,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69755,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97381,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125007,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13172,"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":19562,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24843,"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":55078,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:69","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","summary_en":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82704,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:69","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","summary_en":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110330,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:69","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","summary_en":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137956,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:69","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:69","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:69-75<\/strong> Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","summary_en":"26:69-75 Peter’s denials fulfill Jesus’ prediction (26:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"73":[{"id":55079,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:73","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:73","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","summary_en":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82705,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:73","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:73","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","summary_en":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110331,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:73","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:73","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","summary_en":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137957,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:73","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:73","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:73<\/strong> <em>your Galilean accent:<\/em> Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","summary_en":"26:73 your Galilean accent: Jews from Galilee had a distinctive accent, compared with those from Judea (cp. 4:13 and corresponding study note).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"75":[{"id":55080,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:75","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:75","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","summary_en":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82706,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:75","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:75","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","summary_en":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110332,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:75","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:75","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","summary_en":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137958,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 26:75","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 26:75","content_ro":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>26:75<\/strong> When the crowing of the <em>rooster<\/em> reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.<\/p>","summary_ro":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","summary_en":"26:75 When the crowing of the rooster reminded Peter of Jesus’ prediction (26:34), he was struck with sorrow.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Matei 26
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨