Geneza 5
1 Iată cartea neamurilor lui Adam. În ziua când a făcut Dumnezeu pe om, l-a făcut după asemănarea lui Dumnezeu.
2 I-a făcut parte bărbătească şi parte femeiască, i-a binecuvântat, şi le-a dat numele de ,,om``, în ziua când au fost făcuţi.
3 La vârsta de o sută treizeci de ani, Adam a născut un fiu după chipul şi asemănarea lui, şi i-a pus numele Set.
4 După naşterea lui Set, Adam a trăit opt sute de ani; şi a născut fii şi fiice.
5 Toate zilele pe cari le-a trăit Adam, au fost de nouă sute trei zeci de ani; apoi a murit.
6 La vârsta de o sută cinci ani, Set a născut pe Enos.
7 După naşterea lui Enos, Set a mai trăit opt sute şapte ani, şi a născut fii şi fiice.
8 Toate zilele lui Set au fost de nouă sute doisprezece ani; apoi a murit.
9 La vrâsta de nouăzeci de ani, Enos a născut pe Cainan.
10 După naşterea lui Cainan, Enos a mai trăit opt sute cincisprezece ani, şi a născut fii şi fiice.
11 Toate zilele lui Enos au fost de nouă sute cinci ani; apoi a murit.
12 La vrâsta de şapte zeci de ani, Cainan a născut pe Mahalaleel.
13 După naşterea lui Mahalaleel, Cainan a mai trăit opt sute patruzeci de ani; şi a născut fii şi fiice.
14 Toate zilele lui Cainan au fost de nouă sute zece ani; apoi a murit.
15 La vrâsta de şase zeci şi cinci de ani, Mahalaleel a născut pe Iared.
16 După naşterea lui Iared, Mahalaleel a mai trăit opt sute treizeci de ani; şi a născut fii şi fiice.
17 Toate zilele lui Mahalaleel au fost de opt sute nouăzeci şi cinci de ani; apoi a murit.
18 La vrâsta de o sută şasezeci şi doi de ani, Iared a născut pe Enoh.
19 După naşterea lui Enoh, Iared a mai trăit opt sute de ani; şi a născut fii şi fiice.
20 Toate zilele lui Iared au fost de nouă sute şase zeci şi doi de ani; apoi a murit.
21 La vrâsta de şase zeci şi cinci de ani, Enoh a născut pe Metusala.
22 După naşterea lui Metusala, Enoh a umblat cu Dumnezeu trei sute de ani; şi a născut fii şi fiice.
23 Toate zilele lui Enoh au fost trei sute şase zeci şi cinci de ani.
24 Enoh a umblat cu Dumnezeu; apoi nu s-a mai văzut, pentru că l-a luat Dumnezeu.
25 La vrâsta de o sută opt zeci şi şapte de ani, Metusala a născut pe Lameh.
26 După naşterea lui Lameh, Metusala a mai trăit şapte sute opt zeci şi doi de ani; şi a născut fii şi fiice.
27 Toate zilele lui Metusala au fost de nouă sute şase zeci şi nouă de ani; apoi a murit.
28 La vârsta de o sută optzeci şi doi de ani, Lameh a născut un fiu.
29 El i-a pus numele Noe, zicând: ,,Acesta ne va mângâia pentru osteneala şi truda mânilor noastre, cari vin din acest pământ, pe care l-a blestemat Domnul.``
30 După naşterea lui Noe, Lameh a mai trăit cinci sute nouă zeci şi cinci de ani; şi a născut fii şi fiice.
31 Toate zilele lui Lameh au fost de şapte sute şaptezeci şi şapte de ani; apoi a murit.
32 Noe, la vrâsta de cinci sute de ani, a născut pe Sem, Ham şi Iafet.
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":40469,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Adam and Eve","title_en":"Adam and Eve","content_ro":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","summary_en":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68095,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Adam and Eve","title_en":"Adam and Eve","content_ro":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","summary_en":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95721,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Adam and Eve","title_en":"Adam and Eve","content_ro":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","summary_en":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123347,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Adam and Eve","title_en":"Adam and Eve","content_ro":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Adam and Eve<\/h3>\n<p>Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity that God intended for man and woman in marriage (2:23-25). She is honored as “the mother of all who live” (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>After the serpent deceived Eve into rejecting God’s rule, Adam also rebelled (3:1-6). Their willful disobedience disrupted their relationship (3:7) and separated them from God. God looked for Adam after his rebellion; he and Eve were hiding among the trees, already aware of the alienation (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam blamed Eve and, by implication, God (3:12). Their rebellion brought pain, strained relationships, hardship in governing the earth, and death—physical and spiritual (3:16-19, 22-24). Nonetheless, God provided animal skins to cover Adam and Eve (3:21), and promised that Eve’s offspring would defeat Satan (3:15; see Rom 16:20; Rev 12:1-9; 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Adam was a historical individual (Gen 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14; Jude 1:14) who also represents humanity as a whole. God’s mandates (Gen 1:26-30) and curses (3:16-19) affected not only Adam and Eve, but the entire human race. Adam represents separation from God, which all humanity experiences.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul contrasted those represented by Adam, the first man, with those who follow Christ, the “last Adam” (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:45-50; see also Rom 8:5-11, 20-22). Those represented by Adam live only after his example—they partake of his sin, his alienation from God and God’s creation, and his spiritual death. By contrast, those who follow Christ live by faith in him. They are recreated in Christ’s image and become “new people” who partake of a new creation (see Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The barriers Adam and Eve raised are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16); Christ restores what they lost.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:26-31; 2:4–3:24; 4:25–5:5; Hos 6:6-7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45-49; 1 Tim 2:13-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","summary_en":"Adam and Eve Adam was the first man, the father of the human race. God created the first couple in his image to populate the earth and rule the created order (Gen 1:26-31). God made Adam from the earth and breathed life into him (2:7); he was to cultivate the garden in which God placed him (2:15), name the animals (2:19-20), and follow God’s instructions (1:28; 2:16-17). God created the first woman as a companion and helper for Adam (2:18-22). Eve’s creation from Adam’s rib portrays the unity...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":489,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adam (Person)","title_en":"Adam (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","summary_en":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6419,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (Old Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (Old Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper historical background of the biblical texts. In general, the chronology of the OT is understood well enough to vindicate the basic accuracy and sequential order of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Both biblical and nonbiblical materials are utilized by students of OT chronology. Biblical data include (1) genealogies showing personal and tribal affiliations among various peoples; (2) specific numbers given by biblical authors to indicate a person’s longevity, a king’s reign, or the duration of a specific event; (3) synchronizing statements that date an event in a specific year of a king’s reign or relate it to a natural phenomenon assumed to be common knowledge at the time of writing (e.g., Am 1:1; Zec 14:5).<\/p>\n<p>From the abundance of such chronological passages in the OT, one might conclude that establishment of OT dates and sequences would be a simple procedure. Each of the three kinds of biblical materials, however, exhibits special problems that must be solved first.<\/p>\n<p>Nonbiblical materials that shed light on OT chronology are quite numerous, and more are discovered year by year. They include (1) official records of important affairs such as military campaigns from countries like Egypt or Babylonia; (2) official inscriptions that are dedicatory or commemorate a great victory; (3) annals listing major accomplishments of a ruler year by year; (4) ostraca (inscribed pieces of pottery) containing letters, tax transactions and economic records, military dispatches between field leaders and command headquarters, or other information. Ostraca may be dated archaeologically and are often used to supplement the biblical record.<\/p>\n<p>The chronologist tries to examine the pertinent biblical and nonbiblical information, notes areas of correlation among all the data, and finally establishes a working system into which the most facts can be fitted. New evidence uncovered at any time may necessitate shifts in the present working system. Although the basic structure of biblical chronology seems reasonably firm, many details will no doubt be subject to change as new evidence is discovered.<\/p>\n<p>As a general rule, the earlier the period, the less certain one can be of one’s dating. In the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>, for example, many dates can be assigned within a range of about 100 years. By the time of David and Solomon (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>), the margin of error over which scholars debate is a decade or less. The range narrows as one comes toward the present, so that, with the exception of one or two problem eras, dates accurate to within one or two years are possible by roughly the middle of the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>. Such limitations must be kept in mind in any examination of the major periods of OT history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<p>• From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<p>• Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n<p>• The Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>• Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n<p>• Beyond 587 <span>BC<\/span><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PrepatriarchalPeriod\">Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<h5>Biblical Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>In the first 11 chapters of Genesis are found accounts of the Creation (chs 1–2), the fall (ch 3), Cain and Abel (ch 4), the Flood (chs 6–9), and the Tower of Babel (ch 11). Those events are set within a certain chronological framework.<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 5, a period of 10 generations elapsed between the Creation and the Flood. Although the individuals listed enjoyed a total life span of a hefty 847 years plus, the total time elapsing between Adam and the Flood was only 1,656 years.<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 11, another 10 generations elapsed from the time of the Flood until the time of Abraham (at least in the Septuagint, the third-century <span>BC<\/span> Greek translation of the OT; the Hebrew Masoretic text has 9). In that period the average age attained by individuals in the list is 346 years (using a figure of 460 for Arphaxad’s son Cainan, who is included in v 13 of the LXX; cf. Lk 3:36); the total elapsed time from the Flood to Abraham is only 520 years. Taken literally, that would mean that all of Abraham’s ancestors as far back as Noah’s son Shem were still alive at Abraham’s birth, and that a total of only 2,176 years elapsed from the time of Creation to Abraham.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretation of the Biblical Data<\/h5>\n<p>A literalistic or slavishly mathematical interpretation of the figures, as has appeared in the margin of many <span>kjv<\/span> Bibles, requires a number of assumptions: that no names are omitted from the genealogies, that all the numbers given are consecutive, and especially that numbers used in an ancient biblical source carry the same meaning as that associated with them in the modern Western mind. Each assumption needs serious examination in the light of other established facts.<\/p>\n<p>A cursory reading of other biblical genealogies, for example, reveals that not all the names of a given family were always included. Even Matthew recorded a total of 28 generations (two sets of 14 each) between David and Jesus, and comparison with OT genealogies reveals that Matthew omitted several names. Luke listed a total of 42 generations for the same interval. Omissions are also obvious when one compares the genealogical lists given in 1 Chronicles 1–8 with those recorded earlier in Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings.<\/p>\n<p>Further, ancient peoples thought of numbers in a schematic or stylized way. Use of numbers among the ancient Near Eastern nations differed sharply from current Western practice. Examples of that practice are known from both biblical and nonbiblical sources. For example, a list of eight Sumerian kings who ruled in the city of Shurruppak before the “great flood” of the Jemdet Nar era (c. 3000 <span>BC<\/span>) assigns each man an average reign of more than 30,000 years. Berossus, a Babylonian priest of Marduk living in the third century <span>BC<\/span>, added two names to the eight found in that earlier list of kings and assigned an average of 43,200 years to each king. Such extraordinarily high numbers provide a perspective for considering the numbers of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, although one can assume that the numbers assigned to the ages of the patriarchs preceding Abraham in Genesis had real meaning for those responsible for their preservation, they should not be employed in a purely literal sense to compute the length of the various generations mentioned in the text. Further, the numbers given in the Septuagint and in the Samaritan Pentateuch, another early version of the Pentateuch, diverge in many details from those of the Hebrew Masoretic Text. That means, among other things, that the Genesis numbers caused problems for even the earliest scholars of Scripture.<\/p>\n<h5>Nonbiblical Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Archaeology provides no evidence that may be used to date either the Creation or any other account preserved in Genesis 1–11. The Flood is an example that illustrates some of the difficulties. Many claims have been made by persons from a wide variety of backgrounds (scientists, explorers, theologians, and others) to the effect that archaeology has proven the Genesis Flood narrative to be true. Yet no city so far excavated in Palestine and Syria (including some of the oldest towns in the world) shows archaeological evidence of the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Although several cities in Mesopotamia do exhibit evidence of a flood, three factors make it difficult to link that evidence with Genesis 6–9. Each of the flood levels so far discovered dates from a different period. Further, since nearby sites show no evidence of flooding, all of the Mesopotamian flood evidence points to relatively small local floods. Finally, the evidence indicates no great cultural discontinuities of the sort that would result from destruction of an entire population. Thus, it seems that the ancient Mesopotamian floods discovered through archaeological research are of the same kind as the floods that still occur in the Euphrates River valley.<\/p>\n<p>Clearly, certain questions one might ask of the Genesis narratives simply cannot be answered. Many who regard the Bible as the Word of God have concluded that the dating of events found in Genesis 1–11 must be less important than the theological truths of salvation, faith, and obedience that these accounts present.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FromAbrahamtoMoses\">From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchal Age<\/h5>\n<p>The date of Abraham is still a lively topic among biblical scholars who agree that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed historical persons. Opinions range from an early-date view that estimates that the patriarchal age extended from 2086 to 1871 <span>BC<\/span>, to a late-date view placing Abraham at around 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. Since each position claims to fit the biblical data, a closer look at the two points of view is in order.<\/p>\n<p>Many OT passages seem to support the view that puts Abraham at a comparatively early date. First Kings 6:1 computes 480 years back from the founding of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign (961 <span>BC<\/span>, according to the early-date view) to the exodus from Egypt, which would then be dated 1441 <span>BC<\/span>. Counting 430 years as the period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt (see Gn 15:13; Ex 12:40) takes the date back to 1871 <span>BC<\/span>. To that date are added the 215 years demanded by the total of (1) Abraham’s age upon entering Canaan (75 years according to Gn 12:4); (2) 25 additional years before the birth of Isaac (Gn 21:5); (3) 60 more years to the birth of Jacob (Gn 25:26); and (4) the appearance of Jacob before the pharaoh at age 130 (Gn 47:9). Those 215 years added to the previous total give a date of 2086 <span>BC<\/span> for the entrance of Abraham into Canaan and a date of 2161 <span>BC<\/span> for his birth.<\/p>\n<p>Such a calculation does not use all of the chronological evidence presented in the OT; consequently, the date for Abraham is open to challenge. For example, the 480 years between the exodus and Solomon’s fourth regnal year represent a period of time into which the wilderness wanderings, the career of Joshua and his immediate successors, the period of the judges, Samuel, Saul, and David must all be placed. Although the OT does not specifically say how long were the careers of Joshua, Samuel, or Saul, even a modest reckoning pushes the total years required by all the biblical data together to approximately 600.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, the length of time to be assigned to the Egyptian sojourn is problematic. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint both view the number 430 (in Ex 12:40) as applicable not only to the years in Egypt but to the years of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Canaan as well. Evidently Paul followed the Septuagint tradition when he dated the giving of the law 430 years later than the time of God’s promise to Abraham (see Gal 3:15-18). That means the Septuagint figure cannot be dismissed lightly.<\/p>\n<p>The late dating of Abraham (c. 1400 <span>BC<\/span>) is based on two propositions: (1) The picture of patriarchal society portrayed in Genesis most closely parallels that reflected in the cuneiform tablets recovered from Nuzi, a town in northeastern Mesopotamia about 175 miles (282 kilometers) north of Baghdad. (2) Because those tablets must be dated in the 15th and 14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>, the parallel patriarchal age must have fallen within the same general time period.<\/p>\n<p>Those who hold the late-date view are aware that their date for Abraham cannot be equated with the set of numbers on which the early-date view depends. They point to other data, also from the OT. Joseph, who was already a highly placed Egyptian official when Jacob moved to Egypt, lived to be 110 years old (Gn 50:26). Moses was a great-grandson of Levi, Joseph’s older brother. Since Joseph lived to see his own greatgrandchildren born (who would probably be younger than Moses since their great-grandfather was younger than his), the late-date view concludes that Joseph could have been alive when Moses was born. The four-generation genealogy of Moses (Levi-Kohath-Amram-Moses, in Ex 6:16-20; Nm 3:17-19; 26:58-59; 1 Chr 6:1-3) was evidently thought to be complete according to Genesis 15:16, which predicted that Abraham’s descendants would be freed from Egyptian bondage “in the fourth generation.”<\/p>\n<p>However, a date of around 1400 <span>BC<\/span> for Abraham cannot be aligned with certain other biblical data, including the long Egyptian sojourn demanded by Genesis 15:13 and Exodus 12:40 and a 40-year (or “one-generation”) wilderness existence. Some normally moderate scholars are forced to reduce the wilderness time to two years in order to maintain their late date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>In short, the late-date theory is consistent with part of the biblical evidence (the genealogies of Moses), but the early-date theory conforms to another part (the actual year figures listed in scattered verses from Genesis and Exodus). The late-date theory holds that the genealogies represent more reliable information in Semitic societies generally, whereas the early-date theory computes years given in the biblical account literally throughout its scheme.<\/p>\n<p>Because of problems attached to both positions, a large group of scholars take a middle ground in dating the patriarchal age. Archaeologically, they say, Abraham and his life and times fit perfectly within the early second millennium, but imperfectly within any later period. By placing Abraham roughly between 1800 and 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, they provide enough latitude for a merging of all the available evidence, biblical and nonbiblical, into a workable chronological scheme. Archaeology provides four major bits of evidence for an early second-millennium patriarchal era.<\/p>\n<p>1. Though the Nuzi tablets furnish a clear parallel to patriarchal social life, other tablets from other towns and an earlier era reflect many of the same customs common to Nuzi and Genesis. Since the Nuzians were Hurrians who came to northeastern Mesopotamia from elsewhere (perhaps Armenia), their social customs originated no doubt much earlier than the time of their tablets now in our possession. Accordingly, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> date of the Nuzi tablets does not preclude an earlier date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<li>2. The names of several of Abraham’s ancestors listed in Genesis 11 can now be identified with towns in the northern area of Mesopotamia around Haran, the city from which Abraham migrated to Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:3). Significantly, Haran flourished in the 19th and 18th centuries <span>BC<\/span>.<\/li>\n<li>3. Shortly after 2000 <span>BC<\/span> Semitic nomads from the desert invaded the civilized communities of the Fertile Crescent. Those invaders, called Amorites in the OT, established themselves in several cities in northern Syria and Mesopotamia. One of the Amorite cities was Babylon, ruled by Hammurabi sometime around the beginning of the 18th century <span>BC<\/span>. Although the King Amraphel of Genesis 14:1 is not linguistically identifiable with the Babylonian king Hammurabi, as earlier scholars believed, the picture of the times following the Amorite invasion still accords well with the Genesis narratives generally.<\/li>\n<li>4. Mari, another Amorite town, is now well known because of more than 20,000 tablets recovered from its royal palace and archives. Geographically, Mari is located in the general area of Haran. Chronologically, the tablets recovered come from the 18th century <span>BC<\/span>. One 18th-century king of Mari, Zimri Lim, carried on extensive correspondence with Hammurabi of Babylon. The tablets from Mari also furnish valuable information about tribal and ethnic groups and their movements in the general region. Of basic importance for dating the Genesis materials are certain documents from Mari that include personal names very similar to Abraham (Abi-ram), Jacob, Laban, and several other West Semitic names.<\/li>\n<p>Archaeological evidence neither proves nor disproves the actual existence of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. That is admitted on all sides. What archaeology has done is to provide a framework of probabilities within which the biblical patriarchal narratives appear more and more to be at home.<\/p>\n<h5>Date of the Exodus<\/h5>\n<p>The problem of dating the patriarchal age is closely related to the problem of assigning a date to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Since the evidence does not permit a precise date for Abraham, a precise date for the entry of Joseph or Jacob into Egypt is likewise unobtainable. Further, the biblical evidence does not yield an exact figure for the length of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>For many years biblical scholars viewed 1 Kings 6:1 as a foundation upon which to build an unshakable date for the exodus. Because Solomon’s fourth year could be unquestionably fixed to within at least a 10-year span (967–958 <span>BC<\/span>), the exodus too could be dated with the same precision simply by adding 480 years. But other biblical data raise serious questions about that simple procedure. When the Bible deals with all the events between the time of the exodus and the founding of Solomon’s temple, that is, from Numbers to 1 Kings 5:18, the precise numbers given total not 480 but closer to 600 years.<\/p>\n<p>Because the evidence is insufficient to allow a precise date for the exodus, scholarly opinion remains divided between two possibilities. A 15th-century exodus is supported by several pieces of evidence. The chronology in 1 Kings 6:1 appears to be independently corroborated by a passage in Judges 11:26. It claims that Israel had occupied the area around Heshbon for 300 years preceding Jephthah’s own day. If Jephthah is dated at roughly 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, one is obviously led back to an exodus in the middle of the 15th century. Also, three successive generations of pharaohs who ruled in the 16th and 15th centuries produced no male offspring, making it more likely that Moses would have become the foster son of a royal princess during that time; all of the 19th-dynasty kings (1306–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) had legitimate male heirs.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, a 15th-century date makes possible a connection between the Habiru invasion of Canaan (1400–1350 <span>BC<\/span>)—described in the Amarna letters found at Tell el-Amarna, Egypt—and the invasion of Canaan by the Hebrews described in the OT book of Joshua. Related to that is a reference to “Israel” in the Merneptah Stele, a stone pillar inscribed with the deeds of the Egyptian king, Merneptah, of about 1220 <span>BC<\/span>. It implies that the people referred to, met by Merneptah in the course of a Canaanite military campaign, had been in existence for some time. Finally, an excavator of Jericho, John Garstang, placed the destruction of that city at around 1400 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Other evidence, however, strongly implies not a 15th- but a 13th-century date for the exodus. Many scholars assign a date between 1290 and 1275 <span>BC<\/span> on the basis of that evidence. First, the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 discussed above may be interpreted as schematically representing 12 generations, as indicated by 1 Chronicles 6:3-8. Thus if 12 generations averaged 25 years instead of 40 years, the reduction of 480 schematized years to 300 actual years would point to an exodus date of around 1266 <span>BC<\/span>. Second, archaeological evidence exists that dates destruction at the assumed sites of several cities conquered by Joshua (Lachish, Debir, Bethel, and Hazor) to the late 13th century. Third, there is no biblical mention of Egyptian military campaigns (such as Merneptah’s 1220 <span>BC<\/span> incursion); Israelites living in Canaan before the time of the militarily active pharaohs Seti I (1319–1301 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ramses II (1301–1234 <span>BC<\/span>) would certainly have been affected by such activity. Fourth, Exodus 1:11 mentions the city of Rameses, the capital built by Ramses II, according to his own inscriptions. A fifth line of argument comes from archaeological conclusions that Transjordan and the Negev Desert were not occupied by sedentary people between 1900 and 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas the Bible states clearly that the Israelites encountered stiff opposition from groups in that same region. Thus, it is argued, the Israelites must have entered that region after 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. Sixth, connecting the Habiru with the Israelites of the Conquest lacks weight because many texts besides the Amarna tablets attest to the existence of Habiru groups virtually all over the ancient Near East. “Habiru” seems to be a much broader term, possibly meaning “trespasser,” and is probably unrelated etymologically or semantically to “Hebrew.” Seventh, and finally, Garstang’s work at Jericho has now been revised by archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, who showed that the fallen walls that Garstang had dated about 1400 <span>BC<\/span> in reality were destroyed in 1800 <span>BC<\/span> or earlier.<\/p>\n<p>So far, it has been impossible to decide with precision between the two centuries proposed for the exodus. The majority opinion among OT scholars generally, including a growing number of moderate or conservative scholars, is in favor of the 13th-century option. On the other hand, many other conservative scholars continue to favor the 15th-century date. Dogmatism is unwarranted since problems remain unresolved with either option.<\/p>\n<p>In accordance with the majority opinion, however, a date of about 1290 <span>BC<\/span> for the exodus will be used in dealing with subsequent problems.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ConquestandConsolidation\">Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n<p>The chronological task for the period of conquest and consolidation is to fit all the events narrated by the OT, chiefly in Joshua and Judges, between the exodus (c. 1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the times of David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>) and Solomon (d. 930 <span>BC<\/span>). In other words, one must fit roughly 550 years of biblical events between Moses and David into a 290-year span.<\/p>\n<p>Although assigning an early date for the exodus (c. 1447 <span>BC<\/span>) would make the task somewhat easier, the mere addition of about 157 years does not by itself solve all the problems. Neither date allows enough time for all the OT events from Joshua to David to take place singly and consecutively. Accordingly, advocates of both dates assume that some of the judges ruled simultaneously rather than consecutively. The difference is one of degree only.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua furnishes most of the OT evidence regarding the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. Unfortunately, the book of Joshua has no chronological notes that specify the amount of time elapsing during Joshua’s career. Further, there are no biblical references to major contemporary events in other parts of the ancient world, the dates of which could be used to fix the chronology. Rather, in what is obviously a telescoped account, the book of Joshua records the fall of Jericho and Ai, followed closely by a southern and then a northern campaign. After those victories, covering much of the total territory of Canaan, various parcels of land were distributed to the tribal groups of Israel; the tribes were expected to complete the task of destroying whatever Canaanite inhabitants remained in their particular region. One seeks in vain, however, for any statements indicating how long those events took.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Judges a slightly different circumstance prevails. There the OT furnishes a rather complete list of figures to indicate the duration of periods of foreign oppression, judgeships, and ensuing peace. The total number of years described for that period is 410, but that total does not include any time for the many “minor” judges. It seems obvious, therefore, that most if not all of the judges were simply local chieftains whose activity was simultaneous with that of other judges, at least for part of their reign. Unfortunately, the book of Judges provides no cross-reference system to indicate which judges were contemporaries of which others. Perhaps the best one can do is to assume general guidelines for the chronology of that period between Moses and David.<\/p>\n<p>Two significant facts should be kept in mind. First, archaeological information seems to demand a Conquest date beginning about 1250 <span>BC<\/span> rather than 200 years earlier. Assuming concurrent careers for the judges allows one to compress the literal OT figures into the general scheme demanded by other evidence.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the ancient scribes evidently related the chronology of the period to a 40-year or generation-based schema, a practice that lasted until the time of the divided kingdom, when a regular dynastic chronology was introduced. In the face of so many careers being assigned exactly 40 years, the fact remains that the literal totals of such numbers cannot be harmonized with either the biblical or the archaeological evidence for the period. Accordingly, most scholars doubt that the number 40 was ever intended to be an exact mathematical calculation. That view permits enough leeway for cautious fitting of biblical and other evidence into a general timetable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMonarchy\">The Monarchy<\/p>\n<h5>Types of Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>For the period of the Israelite monarchy, chronological evidence is abundant.<\/p>\n<p>The OT itself strives to provide all the information necessary for the chronology of the period, including (1) a complete list of all the kings in Israel and in Judah both before and after the division of the kingdom; (2) the age of each king (except Saul) at his accession; (3) synchronisms of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah showing in what year of his contemporary in the other kingdom each king came to the throne; and (4) precise calculations of the length of each king’s reign. In addition some important events are dated by reference to another event; others are coordinated with concurrent events in secular history.<\/p>\n<p>Outside the OT an abundance of material provides evidence for a chronology of the period. By far the most important single source is a collection of Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> lists. In Assyria a record of each king’s reign was kept on a particular kind of annal. Each year of reign was named after an individual of high rank in the court; the first year was named after the king himself, the second after the next highest-ranking official (though that name appears to have been selected by lot originally), and so on, down until the death of the king. The word <em>limmu<\/em> was used to introduce the name of the official after whom the current year was to be named, hence the designation <em>“limmu<\/em> lists.”<\/p>\n<p>Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> lists are tied precisely to the solar year, making the documents highly reliable. Further, in addition to many events in Assyrian history, notable natural phenomena were dated on the basis of the <em>limmu<\/em> in which they occurred. For example, a solar eclipse dated by the Assyrian scribes in the <em>limmu<\/em> year of Bur-Sagale has been computed astronomically as June 15, 763 <span>BC<\/span>. Beginning with the year 763, then, and working both backward and forward, a complete list of Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> officials has been obtained for the period between 891 and 648 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>With the accuracy of the Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> lists corroborated by a number of sources, they can be used with confidence in reconstructing the chronology of the corresponding period of biblical history. That is especially true where a biblical writer related an Israelite or a Judahite event to a particular year in the reign of an Assyrian king whose <em>limmu<\/em> list indicates the precise years of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>There are also records from Chaldean (Babylonian) king lists and from later Greek historians. Ptolemy, in the second century <span>AD<\/span>, for example, gave dates for Babylonian kings from 747 <span>BC<\/span> and continued with dates for Persian, Greek, and Roman rulers down to <span>AD<\/span> 161. Finally, useful information is found in inscriptions from monuments, stelae, and other artifacts from Assyria and elsewhere.<\/p>\n<h5>Monarchical Chronology<\/h5>\n<p>The <em>limmu<\/em> list of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III provides a basis for the first comparison of dates among Assyria, Israel, and Judah. In the <em>limmu<\/em> of Daian-Assur, Shalmaneser’s sixth year on the throne, Ahab of Israel was listed as one of the kings who fought against the Assyrians in the battle of Qarqar. Thus the date for that battle may be placed confidently in 853 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Assyrian records also indicate that Shalmaneser III came into contact with an Israelite king 12 years later, in 841 <span>BC<\/span>. That king was Jehu. Thus two fixed points are available for correlating the biblical information. Following the death of Ahab, which is not dated exactly by reference to the Assyrian records, two of his sons came to power. The first, Ahaziah, reigned two years (1 Kgs 22:51); the second, Joram (also called Jehoram), reigned a total of 12 years (2 Kgs 3:1). Recognizing a nonaccession-year reckoning by the Israelites in that era, the apparent total of 14 years may be reduced to an actual total of 12. Thus it seems evident that Ahab not only fought Shalmaneser III in 853 <span>BC<\/span> but also died in that year. Ahab was then followed by his two sons for a total of 12 years before the accession of Jehu in time to account for his contact with Shalmaneser II in 841 <span>BC<\/span>. Further, because Jehu murdered both the king of Israel (Jehoram) and the king of Judah (Ahaziah) at the same time (2 Kgs 9:24-27), a fixed synchronism is provided between the two kingdoms for the year 841 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The first nine kings of Israel ruled an apparent total of 98 years or an actual total (taking into account Israel’s nonaccession-year policy) of 90 years. Zimri, who ruled only seven days (1 Kgs 16:15-18), counts as one of the nine but does not insert an extra year in either the actual or apparent totals. The accession of Jeroboam I thus occurred in 930 <span>BC<\/span> (adding 90 years to 841 <span>BC<\/span>), and Rehoboam of Judah began to rule in that same year as well. Allowing Solomon the 40-year reign indicated in 1 Kings 11:42 points to the year 970 <span>BC<\/span> for his accession. The death of David would also be pinpointed in that period, although allowance must be made for the possibility of a short co-regency of David and Solomon before David’s death. The reign of Saul then falls approximately in the late 11th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In Judah the period between the death of Solomon in 930 <span>BC<\/span> and the murder of Ahaziah by Jehu in 841 <span>BC<\/span> was occupied by the kingships of six men whose time on the throne totals 95 biblical years. Computation of that era in Judah is not as simple as for the Israelite kings for several reasons. Problems include a change from accession- to nonaccession-year reckoning sometime around 850 <span>BC<\/span>, at least two co-regencies (Jehoshaphat with Asa and then Jehoram with Jehoshaphat), and the calendar differences between the two kingdoms. It is clear that the 95 apparent years must be reduced, on the basis of the differences in computation and calendar, to 90 actual years in order to bring the Judahite figures into line with the established Assyrian and Israelite synchronisms.<\/p>\n<p>After the year 841, the next biblical event to be certified by nonbiblical materials is the fall of Samaria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>. That date is furnished by the annals of Sargon II of Assyria (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>), successor to Shalmaneser V (727–722 <span>BC<\/span>). Although that date comes just 120 years after the fixed point of 841 <span>BC<\/span> in Israelite history, the chronological materials for that period are quite difficult to interpret accurately. In the past, scholars resorted to assumptions of extensive co-regencies, to presumed confusion on the part of certain scribes over methods to be followed in computations, or to other theories in attempting to understand the period. In spite of the many difficulties, however, all the biblical and Assyrian dates for the period of the divided monarchy have been harmonized—with the exception of four figures related to the closing years of the Israelite kingdom, all connected in some way with the problematic reign of Hoshea.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudahaftertheFallofIsrael\">Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Samaria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, OT chronology is concerned only with the southern kingdom of Judah until its destruction some 135 years later. Two events in the biblical record important for establishing a chronology for that period are the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib of Assyria in the late eighth century and the eventual fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in the early sixth century.<\/p>\n<h5>Sennacherib’s Invasion of Judah<\/h5>\n<p>The Assyrian invasion (704–681 <span>BC<\/span>) is recorded in 2 Kings 18:13-16, where verse 13 dates the event to the 14th year of King Hezekiah. Sennacherib’s own inscriptions include a lengthier version of the affair. From them the date of 701 <span>BC<\/span> is established, placing the accession of Hezekiah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>. That much is simple, but problems still arise. For example, 2 Kings 19:9 reports that Sennacherib was in contact with an Ethiopian king, Tirhakah (c. 690–664 <span>BC<\/span>), during the course of his campaign, which included a siege of Jerusalem. Obviously, contact with a ruler who came to power in 690 <span>BC<\/span> at the earliest could not refer to events in 701 <span>BC<\/span>. It is possible, however, that Sennacherib actually made two invasions of Judah, the first in 701 and the second sometime later. The date of that supposed second invasion is not assured, although 2 Kings 19:35-37 may imply that Sennacherib was murdered only shortly after his withdrawal from Jerusalem. Since Sennacherib was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon in the year 681, the presumed second invasion of Judah would have occurred somewhere in the last half of the same decade.<\/p>\n<p>A number of scholars oppose the assumption of a second invasion of Jerusalem by Sennacherib. They suggest the possibility that Tirhakah, though king only from 690 <span>BC<\/span>, may have led troops against Sennacherib as early as 701, before acceding to the throne. The reference to King Tirhakah in 2 Kings 19:9 would then be understood as use of his eventual title in an effort to identify him to a later generation of readers.<\/p>\n<p>However the question of the number of invasions is decided, it is certain that Sennacherib invaded Judah in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the 14th regnal year of Hezekiah. Such a synchronism establishes Hezekiah’s accession year as 715 <span>BC<\/span>, but that date raises another problem. The fall of Samaria, now established at 722, is dated by 2 Kings 18:10 in the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign. The most likely solution is that Hezekiah began a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, six years before Samaria fell. The possibility for confusion arises from the fact that one verse (2 Kgs 18:13; repeated in Is 36:1) synchronizes Sennacherib’s 701 <span>BC<\/span> invasion with the 14th year of Hezekiah’s independent reign; another verse (2 Kgs 18:10) correlates the fall of Samaria with the beginning of Hezekiah’s co-regency. Thus from about 728 to 715 <span>BC<\/span> Hezekiah was co-regent with Ahaz. From 715 to 697 he reigned alone. From 696 to 686 his son Manasseh was co-ruler with him.<\/p>\n<p>According to the chronological information given by a number of verses in 2 Kings, a total of 128 years and six months elapsed between the time of Hezekiah’s accession in 715 and the capture of King Jehoiachin in 597, a date to be discussed below. Thus another problem is to explain the more than 10-year excess apparently demanded by the biblical totals. The best solution appears to lie in the assumption that Manasseh first came to power in 697 as co-regent with his father, Hezekiah. Manasseh died in 642, following what 2 Kings 21:1 states was a 55-year reign. Hezekiah, who came to the throne in 715, is said to have reigned 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2), which would mean that he was king until 686, roughly 11 years after the time when Manasseh must have come to the throne in order to have completed a 55-year reign by 642.<\/p>\n<h5>Fall of Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>Contemporary Babylonian records are available to shed valuable light on the last few years of Judah’s existence. For the years 626–623, 618–595, and 556 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonian Chronicle, a formal record of Babylonian affairs of state, has been recovered. From information contained in that chronicle and other cuneiform documents of the period, three dates in Judah’s history may be fixed firmly. The first is the death of Josiah in 609; the second is the battle of Carchemish in 605; the third is the end of the reign of Jehoiachin, which is dated by the Babylonian Chronicle to the second month of Adar in the ninth year of Nebuchadnezzar, or March 16, 597.<\/p>\n<p>After Jehoiachin’s capture, Zedekiah became puppet king of Judah for 11 years (2 Kgs 24:18). On the tenth day of the tenth month during Zedekiah’s ninth regnal year (2 Kgs 25:1), the final siege of Jerusalem was begun by the Babylonian army. That day was January 15, 588. On the ninth day of the fourth month during the 11th regnal year of Zedekiah, after a siege of almost 18 months, the wall of Jerusalem was broken through (2 Kgs 25:3-4). The temple was burned on day seven of the following (fifth) month.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Beyond587bc\">Beyond 586 <span>BC<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Following the tragedy of 586 <span>BC<\/span>, several further developments are given chronological notice in the OT. Jeremiah 52:30 records a third deportation of Jews to Babylonia in the 23d year of King Nebuchadnezzar (582 or 581 <span>BC<\/span>). Both 2 Kings 25:27 and Jeremiah 52:31 give evidence of the release of King Jehoiachin from prison; the Babylonian Chronicle dates that event at 27 Adar, or March 21, 561 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In 539 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonians themselves were destined to learn the meaning of defeat. In that year a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, launched a successful campaign against Babylon and its king, Nabonidus. Inheriting control over the exiled Jews and many other groups of people conquered earlier by Babylonia, Cyrus moved quickly to initiate a policy of tolerance toward his new subjects. In the first year of his rule Cyrus issued an edict making it possible for Jews to return to their former land (Ezr 1:1). On the first day of the following year, 1 Tishri (Ezr 3:6), an altar was set up in Jerusalem. In Iyyar of the following year (April\/May 536) work was begun on the temple itself (Ezr 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>After a period of frustrating work stoppages of varying lengths, the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah spurred on the Jews to complete the temple. Work resumed in 520 (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1, 15) and was finally completed on 3 Adar, or March 12, 515 (Ezr 6:15). The final stages of OT chronology pertain to the careers of Ezra and Nehemiah. The traditional view of their era places Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (458 <span>BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah in the 20th (445 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Date” under each OT book; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper historical background of the biblical texts. In general, the chronology of the OT is understood well enough to vindicate the basic accuracy and sequential order of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Both biblical and nonbiblical materials are utilized by students of OT chronology. Biblical data include (1) genealogies showing personal and tribal affiliations among various peoples; (2) specific numbers given by biblical authors to indicate a person’s longevity, a king’s reign, or the duration of a specific event; (3) synchronizing statements that date an event in a specific year of a king’s reign or relate it to a natural phenomenon assumed to be common knowledge at the time of writing (e.g., Am 1:1; Zec 14:5).<\/p>\n<p>From the abundance of such chronological passages in the OT, one might conclude that establishment of OT dates and sequences would be a simple procedure. Each of the three kinds of biblical materials, however, exhibits special problems that must be solved first.<\/p>\n<p>Nonbiblical materials that shed light on OT chronology are quite numerous, and more are discovered year by year. They include (1) official records of important affairs such as military campaigns from countries like Egypt or Babylonia; (2) official inscriptions that are dedicatory or commemorate a great victory; (3) annals listing major accomplishments of a ruler year by year; (4) ostraca (inscribed pieces of pottery) containing letters, tax transactions and economic records, military dispatches between field leaders and command headquarters, or other information. Ostraca may be dated archaeologically and are often used to supplement the biblical record.<\/p>\n<p>The chronologist tries to examine the pertinent biblical and nonbiblical information, notes areas of correlation among all the data, and finally establishes a working system into which the most facts can be fitted. New evidence uncovered at any time may necessitate shifts in the present working system. Although the basic structure of biblical chronology seems reasonably firm, many details will no doubt be subject to change as new evidence is discovered.<\/p>\n<p>As a general rule, the earlier the period, the less certain one can be of one’s dating. In the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>, for example, many dates can be assigned within a range of about 100 years. By the time of David and Solomon (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>), the margin of error over which scholars debate is a decade or less. The range narrows as one comes toward the present, so that, with the exception of one or two problem eras, dates accurate to within one or two years are possible by roughly the middle of the ninth century <span>BC<\/span>. Such limitations must be kept in mind in any examination of the major periods of OT history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<p>• From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<p>• Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n<p>• The Monarchy<\/p>\n<p>• Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n<p>• Beyond 587 <span>BC<\/span><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PrepatriarchalPeriod\">Prepatriarchal Period<\/p>\n<h5>Biblical Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>In the first 11 chapters of Genesis are found accounts of the Creation (chs 1–2), the fall (ch 3), Cain and Abel (ch 4), the Flood (chs 6–9), and the Tower of Babel (ch 11). Those events are set within a certain chronological framework.<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 5, a period of 10 generations elapsed between the Creation and the Flood. Although the individuals listed enjoyed a total life span of a hefty 847 years plus, the total time elapsing between Adam and the Flood was only 1,656 years.<\/p>\n<p>According to Genesis 11, another 10 generations elapsed from the time of the Flood until the time of Abraham (at least in the Septuagint, the third-century <span>BC<\/span> Greek translation of the OT; the Hebrew Masoretic text has 9). In that period the average age attained by individuals in the list is 346 years (using a figure of 460 for Arphaxad’s son Cainan, who is included in v 13 of the LXX; cf. Lk 3:36); the total elapsed time from the Flood to Abraham is only 520 years. Taken literally, that would mean that all of Abraham’s ancestors as far back as Noah’s son Shem were still alive at Abraham’s birth, and that a total of only 2,176 years elapsed from the time of Creation to Abraham.<\/p>\n<h5>Interpretation of the Biblical Data<\/h5>\n<p>A literalistic or slavishly mathematical interpretation of the figures, as has appeared in the margin of many <span>kjv<\/span> Bibles, requires a number of assumptions: that no names are omitted from the genealogies, that all the numbers given are consecutive, and especially that numbers used in an ancient biblical source carry the same meaning as that associated with them in the modern Western mind. Each assumption needs serious examination in the light of other established facts.<\/p>\n<p>A cursory reading of other biblical genealogies, for example, reveals that not all the names of a given family were always included. Even Matthew recorded a total of 28 generations (two sets of 14 each) between David and Jesus, and comparison with OT genealogies reveals that Matthew omitted several names. Luke listed a total of 42 generations for the same interval. Omissions are also obvious when one compares the genealogical lists given in 1 Chronicles 1–8 with those recorded earlier in Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings.<\/p>\n<p>Further, ancient peoples thought of numbers in a schematic or stylized way. Use of numbers among the ancient Near Eastern nations differed sharply from current Western practice. Examples of that practice are known from both biblical and nonbiblical sources. For example, a list of eight Sumerian kings who ruled in the city of Shurruppak before the “great flood” of the Jemdet Nar era (c. 3000 <span>BC<\/span>) assigns each man an average reign of more than 30,000 years. Berossus, a Babylonian priest of Marduk living in the third century <span>BC<\/span>, added two names to the eight found in that earlier list of kings and assigned an average of 43,200 years to each king. Such extraordinarily high numbers provide a perspective for considering the numbers of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, although one can assume that the numbers assigned to the ages of the patriarchs preceding Abraham in Genesis had real meaning for those responsible for their preservation, they should not be employed in a purely literal sense to compute the length of the various generations mentioned in the text. Further, the numbers given in the Septuagint and in the Samaritan Pentateuch, another early version of the Pentateuch, diverge in many details from those of the Hebrew Masoretic Text. That means, among other things, that the Genesis numbers caused problems for even the earliest scholars of Scripture.<\/p>\n<h5>Nonbiblical Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Archaeology provides no evidence that may be used to date either the Creation or any other account preserved in Genesis 1–11. The Flood is an example that illustrates some of the difficulties. Many claims have been made by persons from a wide variety of backgrounds (scientists, explorers, theologians, and others) to the effect that archaeology has proven the Genesis Flood narrative to be true. Yet no city so far excavated in Palestine and Syria (including some of the oldest towns in the world) shows archaeological evidence of the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Although several cities in Mesopotamia do exhibit evidence of a flood, three factors make it difficult to link that evidence with Genesis 6–9. Each of the flood levels so far discovered dates from a different period. Further, since nearby sites show no evidence of flooding, all of the Mesopotamian flood evidence points to relatively small local floods. Finally, the evidence indicates no great cultural discontinuities of the sort that would result from destruction of an entire population. Thus, it seems that the ancient Mesopotamian floods discovered through archaeological research are of the same kind as the floods that still occur in the Euphrates River valley.<\/p>\n<p>Clearly, certain questions one might ask of the Genesis narratives simply cannot be answered. Many who regard the Bible as the Word of God have concluded that the dating of events found in Genesis 1–11 must be less important than the theological truths of salvation, faith, and obedience that these accounts present.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FromAbrahamtoMoses\">From Abraham to Moses<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchal Age<\/h5>\n<p>The date of Abraham is still a lively topic among biblical scholars who agree that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were indeed historical persons. Opinions range from an early-date view that estimates that the patriarchal age extended from 2086 to 1871 <span>BC<\/span>, to a late-date view placing Abraham at around 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. Since each position claims to fit the biblical data, a closer look at the two points of view is in order.<\/p>\n<p>Many OT passages seem to support the view that puts Abraham at a comparatively early date. First Kings 6:1 computes 480 years back from the founding of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign (961 <span>BC<\/span>, according to the early-date view) to the exodus from Egypt, which would then be dated 1441 <span>BC<\/span>. Counting 430 years as the period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt (see Gn 15:13; Ex 12:40) takes the date back to 1871 <span>BC<\/span>. To that date are added the 215 years demanded by the total of (1) Abraham’s age upon entering Canaan (75 years according to Gn 12:4); (2) 25 additional years before the birth of Isaac (Gn 21:5); (3) 60 more years to the birth of Jacob (Gn 25:26); and (4) the appearance of Jacob before the pharaoh at age 130 (Gn 47:9). Those 215 years added to the previous total give a date of 2086 <span>BC<\/span> for the entrance of Abraham into Canaan and a date of 2161 <span>BC<\/span> for his birth.<\/p>\n<p>Such a calculation does not use all of the chronological evidence presented in the OT; consequently, the date for Abraham is open to challenge. For example, the 480 years between the exodus and Solomon’s fourth regnal year represent a period of time into which the wilderness wanderings, the career of Joshua and his immediate successors, the period of the judges, Samuel, Saul, and David must all be placed. Although the OT does not specifically say how long were the careers of Joshua, Samuel, or Saul, even a modest reckoning pushes the total years required by all the biblical data together to approximately 600.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, the length of time to be assigned to the Egyptian sojourn is problematic. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint both view the number 430 (in Ex 12:40) as applicable not only to the years in Egypt but to the years of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Canaan as well. Evidently Paul followed the Septuagint tradition when he dated the giving of the law 430 years later than the time of God’s promise to Abraham (see Gal 3:15-18). That means the Septuagint figure cannot be dismissed lightly.<\/p>\n<p>The late dating of Abraham (c. 1400 <span>BC<\/span>) is based on two propositions: (1) The picture of patriarchal society portrayed in Genesis most closely parallels that reflected in the cuneiform tablets recovered from Nuzi, a town in northeastern Mesopotamia about 175 miles (282 kilometers) north of Baghdad. (2) Because those tablets must be dated in the 15th and 14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>, the parallel patriarchal age must have fallen within the same general time period.<\/p>\n<p>Those who hold the late-date view are aware that their date for Abraham cannot be equated with the set of numbers on which the early-date view depends. They point to other data, also from the OT. Joseph, who was already a highly placed Egyptian official when Jacob moved to Egypt, lived to be 110 years old (Gn 50:26). Moses was a great-grandson of Levi, Joseph’s older brother. Since Joseph lived to see his own greatgrandchildren born (who would probably be younger than Moses since their great-grandfather was younger than his), the late-date view concludes that Joseph could have been alive when Moses was born. The four-generation genealogy of Moses (Levi-Kohath-Amram-Moses, in Ex 6:16-20; Nm 3:17-19; 26:58-59; 1 Chr 6:1-3) was evidently thought to be complete according to Genesis 15:16, which predicted that Abraham’s descendants would be freed from Egyptian bondage “in the fourth generation.”<\/p>\n<p>However, a date of around 1400 <span>BC<\/span> for Abraham cannot be aligned with certain other biblical data, including the long Egyptian sojourn demanded by Genesis 15:13 and Exodus 12:40 and a 40-year (or “one-generation”) wilderness existence. Some normally moderate scholars are forced to reduce the wilderness time to two years in order to maintain their late date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>In short, the late-date theory is consistent with part of the biblical evidence (the genealogies of Moses), but the early-date theory conforms to another part (the actual year figures listed in scattered verses from Genesis and Exodus). The late-date theory holds that the genealogies represent more reliable information in Semitic societies generally, whereas the early-date theory computes years given in the biblical account literally throughout its scheme.<\/p>\n<p>Because of problems attached to both positions, a large group of scholars take a middle ground in dating the patriarchal age. Archaeologically, they say, Abraham and his life and times fit perfectly within the early second millennium, but imperfectly within any later period. By placing Abraham roughly between 1800 and 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, they provide enough latitude for a merging of all the available evidence, biblical and nonbiblical, into a workable chronological scheme. Archaeology provides four major bits of evidence for an early second-millennium patriarchal era.<\/p>\n<p>1. Though the Nuzi tablets furnish a clear parallel to patriarchal social life, other tablets from other towns and an earlier era reflect many of the same customs common to Nuzi and Genesis. Since the Nuzians were Hurrians who came to northeastern Mesopotamia from elsewhere (perhaps Armenia), their social customs originated no doubt much earlier than the time of their tablets now in our possession. Accordingly, the 15th-century <span>BC<\/span> date of the Nuzi tablets does not preclude an earlier date for Abraham.<\/p>\n<li>2. The names of several of Abraham’s ancestors listed in Genesis 11 can now be identified with towns in the northern area of Mesopotamia around Haran, the city from which Abraham migrated to Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:3). Significantly, Haran flourished in the 19th and 18th centuries <span>BC<\/span>.<\/li>\n<li>3. Shortly after 2000 <span>BC<\/span> Semitic nomads from the desert invaded the civilized communities of the Fertile Crescent. Those invaders, called Amorites in the OT, established themselves in several cities in northern Syria and Mesopotamia. One of the Amorite cities was Babylon, ruled by Hammurabi sometime around the beginning of the 18th century <span>BC<\/span>. Although the King Amraphel of Genesis 14:1 is not linguistically identifiable with the Babylonian king Hammurabi, as earlier scholars believed, the picture of the times following the Amorite invasion still accords well with the Genesis narratives generally.<\/li>\n<li>4. Mari, another Amorite town, is now well known because of more than 20,000 tablets recovered from its royal palace and archives. Geographically, Mari is located in the general area of Haran. Chronologically, the tablets recovered come from the 18th century <span>BC<\/span>. One 18th-century king of Mari, Zimri Lim, carried on extensive correspondence with Hammurabi of Babylon. The tablets from Mari also furnish valuable information about tribal and ethnic groups and their movements in the general region. Of basic importance for dating the Genesis materials are certain documents from Mari that include personal names very similar to Abraham (Abi-ram), Jacob, Laban, and several other West Semitic names.<\/li>\n<p>Archaeological evidence neither proves nor disproves the actual existence of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. That is admitted on all sides. What archaeology has done is to provide a framework of probabilities within which the biblical patriarchal narratives appear more and more to be at home.<\/p>\n<h5>Date of the Exodus<\/h5>\n<p>The problem of dating the patriarchal age is closely related to the problem of assigning a date to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Since the evidence does not permit a precise date for Abraham, a precise date for the entry of Joseph or Jacob into Egypt is likewise unobtainable. Further, the biblical evidence does not yield an exact figure for the length of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>For many years biblical scholars viewed 1 Kings 6:1 as a foundation upon which to build an unshakable date for the exodus. Because Solomon’s fourth year could be unquestionably fixed to within at least a 10-year span (967–958 <span>BC<\/span>), the exodus too could be dated with the same precision simply by adding 480 years. But other biblical data raise serious questions about that simple procedure. When the Bible deals with all the events between the time of the exodus and the founding of Solomon’s temple, that is, from Numbers to 1 Kings 5:18, the precise numbers given total not 480 but closer to 600 years.<\/p>\n<p>Because the evidence is insufficient to allow a precise date for the exodus, scholarly opinion remains divided between two possibilities. A 15th-century exodus is supported by several pieces of evidence. The chronology in 1 Kings 6:1 appears to be independently corroborated by a passage in Judges 11:26. It claims that Israel had occupied the area around Heshbon for 300 years preceding Jephthah’s own day. If Jephthah is dated at roughly 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, one is obviously led back to an exodus in the middle of the 15th century. Also, three successive generations of pharaohs who ruled in the 16th and 15th centuries produced no male offspring, making it more likely that Moses would have become the foster son of a royal princess during that time; all of the 19th-dynasty kings (1306–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) had legitimate male heirs.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, a 15th-century date makes possible a connection between the Habiru invasion of Canaan (1400–1350 <span>BC<\/span>)—described in the Amarna letters found at Tell el-Amarna, Egypt—and the invasion of Canaan by the Hebrews described in the OT book of Joshua. Related to that is a reference to “Israel” in the Merneptah Stele, a stone pillar inscribed with the deeds of the Egyptian king, Merneptah, of about 1220 <span>BC<\/span>. It implies that the people referred to, met by Merneptah in the course of a Canaanite military campaign, had been in existence for some time. Finally, an excavator of Jericho, John Garstang, placed the destruction of that city at around 1400 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Other evidence, however, strongly implies not a 15th- but a 13th-century date for the exodus. Many scholars assign a date between 1290 and 1275 <span>BC<\/span> on the basis of that evidence. First, the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 discussed above may be interpreted as schematically representing 12 generations, as indicated by 1 Chronicles 6:3-8. Thus if 12 generations averaged 25 years instead of 40 years, the reduction of 480 schematized years to 300 actual years would point to an exodus date of around 1266 <span>BC<\/span>. Second, archaeological evidence exists that dates destruction at the assumed sites of several cities conquered by Joshua (Lachish, Debir, Bethel, and Hazor) to the late 13th century. Third, there is no biblical mention of Egyptian military campaigns (such as Merneptah’s 1220 <span>BC<\/span> incursion); Israelites living in Canaan before the time of the militarily active pharaohs Seti I (1319–1301 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ramses II (1301–1234 <span>BC<\/span>) would certainly have been affected by such activity. Fourth, Exodus 1:11 mentions the city of Rameses, the capital built by Ramses II, according to his own inscriptions. A fifth line of argument comes from archaeological conclusions that Transjordan and the Negev Desert were not occupied by sedentary people between 1900 and 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, whereas the Bible states clearly that the Israelites encountered stiff opposition from groups in that same region. Thus, it is argued, the Israelites must have entered that region after 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. Sixth, connecting the Habiru with the Israelites of the Conquest lacks weight because many texts besides the Amarna tablets attest to the existence of Habiru groups virtually all over the ancient Near East. “Habiru” seems to be a much broader term, possibly meaning “trespasser,” and is probably unrelated etymologically or semantically to “Hebrew.” Seventh, and finally, Garstang’s work at Jericho has now been revised by archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, who showed that the fallen walls that Garstang had dated about 1400 <span>BC<\/span> in reality were destroyed in 1800 <span>BC<\/span> or earlier.<\/p>\n<p>So far, it has been impossible to decide with precision between the two centuries proposed for the exodus. The majority opinion among OT scholars generally, including a growing number of moderate or conservative scholars, is in favor of the 13th-century option. On the other hand, many other conservative scholars continue to favor the 15th-century date. Dogmatism is unwarranted since problems remain unresolved with either option.<\/p>\n<p>In accordance with the majority opinion, however, a date of about 1290 <span>BC<\/span> for the exodus will be used in dealing with subsequent problems.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ConquestandConsolidation\">Conquest and Consolidation<\/p>\n<p>The chronological task for the period of conquest and consolidation is to fit all the events narrated by the OT, chiefly in Joshua and Judges, between the exodus (c. 1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the times of David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>) and Solomon (d. 930 <span>BC<\/span>). In other words, one must fit roughly 550 years of biblical events between Moses and David into a 290-year span.<\/p>\n<p>Although assigning an early date for the exodus (c. 1447 <span>BC<\/span>) would make the task somewhat easier, the mere addition of about 157 years does not by itself solve all the problems. Neither date allows enough time for all the OT events from Joshua to David to take place singly and consecutively. Accordingly, advocates of both dates assume that some of the judges ruled simultaneously rather than consecutively. The difference is one of degree only.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Joshua furnishes most of the OT evidence regarding the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. Unfortunately, the book of Joshua has no chronological notes that specify the amount of time elapsing during Joshua’s career. Further, there are no biblical references to major contemporary events in other parts of the ancient world, the dates of which could be used to fix the chronology. Rather, in what is obviously a telescoped account, the book of Joshua records the fall of Jericho and Ai, followed closely by a southern and then a northern campaign. After those victories, covering much of the total territory of Canaan, various parcels of land were distributed to the tribal groups of Israel; the tribes were expected to complete the task of destroying whatever Canaanite inhabitants remained in their particular region. One seeks in vain, however, for any statements indicating how long those events took.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Judges a slightly different circumstance prevails. There the OT furnishes a rather complete list of figures to indicate the duration of periods of foreign oppression, judgeships, and ensuing peace. The total number of years described for that period is 410, but that total does not include any time for the many “minor” judges. It seems obvious, therefore, that most if not all of the judges were simply local chieftains whose activity was simultaneous with that of other judges, at least for part of their reign. Unfortunately, the book of Judges provides no cross-reference system to indicate which judges were contemporaries of which others. Perhaps the best one can do is to assume general guidelines for the chronology of that period between Moses and David.<\/p>\n<p>Two significant facts should be kept in mind. First, archaeological information seems to demand a Conquest date beginning about 1250 <span>BC<\/span> rather than 200 years earlier. Assuming concurrent careers for the judges allows one to compress the literal OT figures into the general scheme demanded by other evidence.<\/p>\n<p>Second, the ancient scribes evidently related the chronology of the period to a 40-year or generation-based schema, a practice that lasted until the time of the divided kingdom, when a regular dynastic chronology was introduced. In the face of so many careers being assigned exactly 40 years, the fact remains that the literal totals of such numbers cannot be harmonized with either the biblical or the archaeological evidence for the period. Accordingly, most scholars doubt that the number 40 was ever intended to be an exact mathematical calculation. That view permits enough leeway for cautious fitting of biblical and other evidence into a general timetable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMonarchy\">The Monarchy<\/p>\n<h5>Types of Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>For the period of the Israelite monarchy, chronological evidence is abundant.<\/p>\n<p>The OT itself strives to provide all the information necessary for the chronology of the period, including (1) a complete list of all the kings in Israel and in Judah both before and after the division of the kingdom; (2) the age of each king (except Saul) at his accession; (3) synchronisms of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah showing in what year of his contemporary in the other kingdom each king came to the throne; and (4) precise calculations of the length of each king’s reign. In addition some important events are dated by reference to another event; others are coordinated with concurrent events in secular history.<\/p>\n<p>Outside the OT an abundance of material provides evidence for a chronology of the period. By far the most important single source is a collection of Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> lists. In Assyria a record of each king’s reign was kept on a particular kind of annal. Each year of reign was named after an individual of high rank in the court; the first year was named after the king himself, the second after the next highest-ranking official (though that name appears to have been selected by lot originally), and so on, down until the death of the king. The word <em>limmu<\/em> was used to introduce the name of the official after whom the current year was to be named, hence the designation <em>“limmu<\/em> lists.”<\/p>\n<p>Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> lists are tied precisely to the solar year, making the documents highly reliable. Further, in addition to many events in Assyrian history, notable natural phenomena were dated on the basis of the <em>limmu<\/em> in which they occurred. For example, a solar eclipse dated by the Assyrian scribes in the <em>limmu<\/em> year of Bur-Sagale has been computed astronomically as June 15, 763 <span>BC<\/span>. Beginning with the year 763, then, and working both backward and forward, a complete list of Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> officials has been obtained for the period between 891 and 648 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>With the accuracy of the Assyrian <em>limmu<\/em> lists corroborated by a number of sources, they can be used with confidence in reconstructing the chronology of the corresponding period of biblical history. That is especially true where a biblical writer related an Israelite or a Judahite event to a particular year in the reign of an Assyrian king whose <em>limmu<\/em> list indicates the precise years of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>There are also records from Chaldean (Babylonian) king lists and from later Greek historians. Ptolemy, in the second century <span>AD<\/span>, for example, gave dates for Babylonian kings from 747 <span>BC<\/span> and continued with dates for Persian, Greek, and Roman rulers down to <span>AD<\/span> 161. Finally, useful information is found in inscriptions from monuments, stelae, and other artifacts from Assyria and elsewhere.<\/p>\n<h5>Monarchical Chronology<\/h5>\n<p>The <em>limmu<\/em> list of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III provides a basis for the first comparison of dates among Assyria, Israel, and Judah. In the <em>limmu<\/em> of Daian-Assur, Shalmaneser’s sixth year on the throne, Ahab of Israel was listed as one of the kings who fought against the Assyrians in the battle of Qarqar. Thus the date for that battle may be placed confidently in 853 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Assyrian records also indicate that Shalmaneser III came into contact with an Israelite king 12 years later, in 841 <span>BC<\/span>. That king was Jehu. Thus two fixed points are available for correlating the biblical information. Following the death of Ahab, which is not dated exactly by reference to the Assyrian records, two of his sons came to power. The first, Ahaziah, reigned two years (1 Kgs 22:51); the second, Joram (also called Jehoram), reigned a total of 12 years (2 Kgs 3:1). Recognizing a nonaccession-year reckoning by the Israelites in that era, the apparent total of 14 years may be reduced to an actual total of 12. Thus it seems evident that Ahab not only fought Shalmaneser III in 853 <span>BC<\/span> but also died in that year. Ahab was then followed by his two sons for a total of 12 years before the accession of Jehu in time to account for his contact with Shalmaneser II in 841 <span>BC<\/span>. Further, because Jehu murdered both the king of Israel (Jehoram) and the king of Judah (Ahaziah) at the same time (2 Kgs 9:24-27), a fixed synchronism is provided between the two kingdoms for the year 841 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The first nine kings of Israel ruled an apparent total of 98 years or an actual total (taking into account Israel’s nonaccession-year policy) of 90 years. Zimri, who ruled only seven days (1 Kgs 16:15-18), counts as one of the nine but does not insert an extra year in either the actual or apparent totals. The accession of Jeroboam I thus occurred in 930 <span>BC<\/span> (adding 90 years to 841 <span>BC<\/span>), and Rehoboam of Judah began to rule in that same year as well. Allowing Solomon the 40-year reign indicated in 1 Kings 11:42 points to the year 970 <span>BC<\/span> for his accession. The death of David would also be pinpointed in that period, although allowance must be made for the possibility of a short co-regency of David and Solomon before David’s death. The reign of Saul then falls approximately in the late 11th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In Judah the period between the death of Solomon in 930 <span>BC<\/span> and the murder of Ahaziah by Jehu in 841 <span>BC<\/span> was occupied by the kingships of six men whose time on the throne totals 95 biblical years. Computation of that era in Judah is not as simple as for the Israelite kings for several reasons. Problems include a change from accession- to nonaccession-year reckoning sometime around 850 <span>BC<\/span>, at least two co-regencies (Jehoshaphat with Asa and then Jehoram with Jehoshaphat), and the calendar differences between the two kingdoms. It is clear that the 95 apparent years must be reduced, on the basis of the differences in computation and calendar, to 90 actual years in order to bring the Judahite figures into line with the established Assyrian and Israelite synchronisms.<\/p>\n<p>After the year 841, the next biblical event to be certified by nonbiblical materials is the fall of Samaria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>. That date is furnished by the annals of Sargon II of Assyria (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>), successor to Shalmaneser V (727–722 <span>BC<\/span>). Although that date comes just 120 years after the fixed point of 841 <span>BC<\/span> in Israelite history, the chronological materials for that period are quite difficult to interpret accurately. In the past, scholars resorted to assumptions of extensive co-regencies, to presumed confusion on the part of certain scribes over methods to be followed in computations, or to other theories in attempting to understand the period. In spite of the many difficulties, however, all the biblical and Assyrian dates for the period of the divided monarchy have been harmonized—with the exception of four figures related to the closing years of the Israelite kingdom, all connected in some way with the problematic reign of Hoshea.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudahaftertheFallofIsrael\">Judah after the Fall of Israel<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Samaria in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, OT chronology is concerned only with the southern kingdom of Judah until its destruction some 135 years later. Two events in the biblical record important for establishing a chronology for that period are the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib of Assyria in the late eighth century and the eventual fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in the early sixth century.<\/p>\n<h5>Sennacherib’s Invasion of Judah<\/h5>\n<p>The Assyrian invasion (704–681 <span>BC<\/span>) is recorded in 2 Kings 18:13-16, where verse 13 dates the event to the 14th year of King Hezekiah. Sennacherib’s own inscriptions include a lengthier version of the affair. From them the date of 701 <span>BC<\/span> is established, placing the accession of Hezekiah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>. That much is simple, but problems still arise. For example, 2 Kings 19:9 reports that Sennacherib was in contact with an Ethiopian king, Tirhakah (c. 690–664 <span>BC<\/span>), during the course of his campaign, which included a siege of Jerusalem. Obviously, contact with a ruler who came to power in 690 <span>BC<\/span> at the earliest could not refer to events in 701 <span>BC<\/span>. It is possible, however, that Sennacherib actually made two invasions of Judah, the first in 701 and the second sometime later. The date of that supposed second invasion is not assured, although 2 Kings 19:35-37 may imply that Sennacherib was murdered only shortly after his withdrawal from Jerusalem. Since Sennacherib was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon in the year 681, the presumed second invasion of Judah would have occurred somewhere in the last half of the same decade.<\/p>\n<p>A number of scholars oppose the assumption of a second invasion of Jerusalem by Sennacherib. They suggest the possibility that Tirhakah, though king only from 690 <span>BC<\/span>, may have led troops against Sennacherib as early as 701, before acceding to the throne. The reference to King Tirhakah in 2 Kings 19:9 would then be understood as use of his eventual title in an effort to identify him to a later generation of readers.<\/p>\n<p>However the question of the number of invasions is decided, it is certain that Sennacherib invaded Judah in 701 <span>BC<\/span>, the 14th regnal year of Hezekiah. Such a synchronism establishes Hezekiah’s accession year as 715 <span>BC<\/span>, but that date raises another problem. The fall of Samaria, now established at 722, is dated by 2 Kings 18:10 in the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign. The most likely solution is that Hezekiah began a co-regency with his father, Ahaz, six years before Samaria fell. The possibility for confusion arises from the fact that one verse (2 Kgs 18:13; repeated in Is 36:1) synchronizes Sennacherib’s 701 <span>BC<\/span> invasion with the 14th year of Hezekiah’s independent reign; another verse (2 Kgs 18:10) correlates the fall of Samaria with the beginning of Hezekiah’s co-regency. Thus from about 728 to 715 <span>BC<\/span> Hezekiah was co-regent with Ahaz. From 715 to 697 he reigned alone. From 696 to 686 his son Manasseh was co-ruler with him.<\/p>\n<p>According to the chronological information given by a number of verses in 2 Kings, a total of 128 years and six months elapsed between the time of Hezekiah’s accession in 715 and the capture of King Jehoiachin in 597, a date to be discussed below. Thus another problem is to explain the more than 10-year excess apparently demanded by the biblical totals. The best solution appears to lie in the assumption that Manasseh first came to power in 697 as co-regent with his father, Hezekiah. Manasseh died in 642, following what 2 Kings 21:1 states was a 55-year reign. Hezekiah, who came to the throne in 715, is said to have reigned 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2), which would mean that he was king until 686, roughly 11 years after the time when Manasseh must have come to the throne in order to have completed a 55-year reign by 642.<\/p>\n<h5>Fall of Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>Contemporary Babylonian records are available to shed valuable light on the last few years of Judah’s existence. For the years 626–623, 618–595, and 556 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonian Chronicle, a formal record of Babylonian affairs of state, has been recovered. From information contained in that chronicle and other cuneiform documents of the period, three dates in Judah’s history may be fixed firmly. The first is the death of Josiah in 609; the second is the battle of Carchemish in 605; the third is the end of the reign of Jehoiachin, which is dated by the Babylonian Chronicle to the second month of Adar in the ninth year of Nebuchadnezzar, or March 16, 597.<\/p>\n<p>After Jehoiachin’s capture, Zedekiah became puppet king of Judah for 11 years (2 Kgs 24:18). On the tenth day of the tenth month during Zedekiah’s ninth regnal year (2 Kgs 25:1), the final siege of Jerusalem was begun by the Babylonian army. That day was January 15, 588. On the ninth day of the fourth month during the 11th regnal year of Zedekiah, after a siege of almost 18 months, the wall of Jerusalem was broken through (2 Kgs 25:3-4). The temple was burned on day seven of the following (fifth) month.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Beyond587bc\">Beyond 586 <span>BC<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Following the tragedy of 586 <span>BC<\/span>, several further developments are given chronological notice in the OT. Jeremiah 52:30 records a third deportation of Jews to Babylonia in the 23d year of King Nebuchadnezzar (582 or 581 <span>BC<\/span>). Both 2 Kings 25:27 and Jeremiah 52:31 give evidence of the release of King Jehoiachin from prison; the Babylonian Chronicle dates that event at 27 Adar, or March 21, 561 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In 539 <span>BC<\/span> the Babylonians themselves were destined to learn the meaning of defeat. In that year a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, launched a successful campaign against Babylon and its king, Nabonidus. Inheriting control over the exiled Jews and many other groups of people conquered earlier by Babylonia, Cyrus moved quickly to initiate a policy of tolerance toward his new subjects. In the first year of his rule Cyrus issued an edict making it possible for Jews to return to their former land (Ezr 1:1). On the first day of the following year, 1 Tishri (Ezr 3:6), an altar was set up in Jerusalem. In Iyyar of the following year (April\/May 536) work was begun on the temple itself (Ezr 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>After a period of frustrating work stoppages of varying lengths, the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah spurred on the Jews to complete the temple. Work resumed in 520 (Ezr 4:24; Hg 1:1, 15) and was finally completed on 3 Adar, or March 12, 515 (Ezr 6:15). The final stages of OT chronology pertain to the careers of Ezra and Nehemiah. The traditional view of their era places Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (458 <span>BC<\/span>) and Nehemiah in the 20th (445 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Date” under each OT book; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Diaspora of the Jews; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the; Postexilic Period; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper his...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (Old Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to assign dates and sequences to OT events. Chronology is a science. It deals with evidence, theories, assumptions, and the balance of probabilities. Often it boils down to a matter of choosing among theories that are equally unable to solve all the problems raised by other points of view. OT chronology is an accredited branch of biblical studies primarily because it is essential for understanding the proper his...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13408,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Genealogy","title_en":"Genealogy","content_ro":"<h3>GENEALOGY<\/h3>\n<p>Record or study of descent involving a tracing backward or forward of the ancestry of a nation, tribe, family, or individual. The Hebrews were not the only people in the ancient world to take an interest in maintaining genealogical records. The Sumerian king list of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span> contains records of the early rulers of Mesopotamia. In Babylonian records the word “son” was frequently used in the sense of “descendant of.” King Tirhakah of Egypt (c. 685 <span>BC<\/span>) referred to his “father,” Sesostris III, who lived some 1,200 years before him. Greeks and Romans also kept genealogical records. However, the biblical genealogies, especially those in Genesis and 1 Chronicles 1–9, are unique in the literature of the ancient Near East. Only at the beginning of the Islamic age are such broad genealogical records found. Even today among tribal Semites, such as Arab nomads, there is an intense interest in genealogy, and it is not unusual for an Arab to be able to recite accurately the names of his ancestors for 10 or 15 generations back, covering a period of several hundred years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TermsUsed\">Terms Used<\/p>\n<p>The word “genealogy” occurs only once as a noun in the Hebrew OT (Neh 7:5), where it refers to a register of those who returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel at the end of the exile. The verbal form of the same word is found a total of 20 times in 1—2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The terms “generations” and “book of the generations,” used in Genesis and elsewhere in the OT, convey the same idea. The equivalent NT terms are found in 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9 (“genealogies”) and Matthew 1:1, which refers to the “book of the genealogy” of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeofGenealogicalRecords\">Purpose of Genealogical Records<\/p>\n<p>The keeping of genealogical records in ancient Israel was an important activity and served a number of useful purposes. God’s promise of a land to Abraham and his descendants made such records necessary to establish and preserve the allotment of the land; a genealogical record served as evidence of a legitimate title to the ancestral property. Genealogies were essential for the preservation of the exclusive priesthood that had been established by the Mosaic law. In the time of Josephus every priest was supposed to be able to prove his descent.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most important reasons for keeping genealogical records was to establish and maintain the right of royal succession in Judah through the family of David. The belief that the Messiah would come from the Davidic house made such records even more important.<\/p>\n<p>Other purposes served by these family records included the imposition of military duty according to families (Nm 1:2-3). Position in camp and on the march from Egypt was determined by tribes and families (2:2, 17; 10:11-28). Also, God’s blessings were passed from one member of the family to his descendants (Gn 27). The stress placed on the purity of the congregation (Dt 7:1-4; 23:1-8) required complete family records, particularly in the postexilic period. With the insistence of Ezra and Nehemiah upon racial purity, and with the purging of foreign elements from among the people (Ezr 2:59-63; 10:9-44; Neh 13:23-28), written evidence of purity of descent became essential; interest in the compilation of genealogies became intense after the exile.<\/p>\n<p>Lineage was ordinarily traced through the male members of the family, with females being mentioned only rarely (e.g., Gn 11:29, Sarah and Milcah; 22:23, Rebekah; and Nm 26:33–27:11, where the property inheritance of the daughters of Zelophehad was involved). Matthew mentions three women: Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth; and in the second group alludes to Bathsheba (see discussion below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PrincipalGenealogicalListsintheBible\">Principal Genealogical Lists in the Bible<\/p>\n<p>The principal sources of genealogical material in the OT are found in Genesis, Numbers, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 1—2 Chronicles (which contain the greatest amount of genealogical material in the Bible), Ezra, and Nehemiah. The genealogies of Jesus Christ in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are the only NT records. Together they contain a genealogical record from Adam to Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Grouped together by historical periods, the following are the principal genealogical lists found in the Bible:<\/p>\n<h5>Before the Flood<\/h5>\n<p>Three lists are from this period. The first, found in Genesis 4:17-22, traces the descendants of Cain through seven generations and explains the hereditary origin of certain occupations and crafts. The second, Genesis 4:25-26, begins the account of the descendants of Seth, the posterity of Adam whose faithfulness to God is contrasted with the ungodly posterity of Cain. The third list, Genesis 5:1-32 (cf. 1 Chr 1:1-4), traces the descendants of Adam through Seth down to Noah and his sons at the time of the Flood.<\/p>\n<h5>From Noah to Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>Genesis 10:1-32 (cf. 1 Chr 1:4-23), frequently called the “table of nations,” contains a list of the nations descended from the sons of Noah (Shem, Ham, and Japheth). Genesis 11:10-26 (cf. 1 Chr 1:24-27) traces the descendants of Shem to the time of Abraham, and Genesis 11:27-30 (see also Gn 22:20-24) lists the descendants of Nahor, Abraham’s brother.<\/p>\n<h5>From Abraham to the Descent into Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The descendants of Abraham by Hagar, Sarah, and Keturah are found in Genesis 16:15, 21:1-3, and 25:1-4 (introducing the Arabs as descendants of Abraham; cf. 1 Chr 1:28-34). Genesis 19:37-38 links the Moabites and Ammonites to Abraham through his nephew Lot. A very important genealogical list during this period is that of the descendants of Jacob, giving the account of the parentage, birth, and naming of the founders of the 12 tribes of Israel (Gn 29:31–30:24; 35:16-26). Esau is acknowledged as the ancestor of the Edomites; his Edomite descendants are traced through his three wives (Gn 26:34; 36:1-43; 1 Chr 1:35-54). The list of Jacob’s family at the time he entered Egypt, numbering 70, is found in Genesis 46:1-27 (cf. Ex 6:14-16; Nm 26:1-51; 1 Chr 2–8). A partial list of the heads of the fathers’ houses of Reuben, Simeon, and Levi is found in Exodus 6:14-25; the chief purpose of this genealogy is to establish Aaron and Moses as members of Levi’s tribe.<\/p>\n<h5>From the Exodus to the Conquest of Canaan<\/h5>\n<p>While the tribes were still in the desert after leaving Egypt, a census was taken to determine the total number of Israelites (Nm 1:4-54; 2:2-33). During this same period, a genealogy of the family of Aaron was compiled, and a separate census was taken of the Levites (3:1-39). A list of the 12 spies who searched out the land and the tribes they represented is given in Numbers 13:4-16; the most important names on this list are Caleb and Joshua. Near the end of the wilderness wanderings, another census of the people was ordered; the total number was approximately the same as that of the first census almost 40 years earlier (26:4-51, 57-62). As the tribes neared the Promised Land, a list was prepared of the tribal representatives who would take part in the division of the land (34:16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Period of the Kings<\/h5>\n<p>During the entire period of the monarchy, over 400 years, the only genealogical records of any consequence are those that pertain to David. His descendants are traced through 20 rulers who sat upon the throne of Judah until the nation fell to the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span> (1—2 Kgs; cf. 1 Chr 11:1—2 Chr 36:21). A list of David’s children is found in 2 Samuel 3:2-5 and 5:14-16 (cf. 1 Chr 3:1-9; 14:4-7). His mighty men, an elite group of soldiers, are named in 2 Samuel 23:8-39 (cf. 1 Chr 11:10-47). His recruits at Ziklag are recorded in 1 Chronicles 12:1-22. Those who were his musicians and doorkeepers when the ark was brought to Jerusalem are named in 1 Chronicles 15:1-24 (cf. 1 Chr 16:5-6, 37-43). David’s political and religious organization of the kingdom—including the Levites, priests, singers, porters and other administrative officials, and military officers—is found in 1 Chronicles 23–27. In spite of the literary activity associated with the reign of Solomon, the only genealogical record preserved from this period is that of Solomon’s princes and 12 officers (1 Kgs 4:1-19). The genealogy of one prophet is traced back four generations (Zep 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Postexilic Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the postexilic period, the keeping of genealogical records probably received its greatest impetus through the activity of Ezra and Nehemiah, primarily because of their insistence upon racial purity and the purging of foreign elements from the community. A list of the exiles who returned with Zerubbabel is found in Ezra 2:1-70 (cf. Neh 7:6-73, where the same list is found). A list of those who returned with Ezra is included in 8:1-20. Ezra’s own genealogy is also recorded (Ezr 7:5). There is a list of the Jews who married foreign women that included priests, Levites, singers, porters, and other Israelites (Ezr 10:18-44). Nehemiah 8:4-7 names the Levites and others who assisted Ezra when he read the law publicly. Nehemiah also contains a list of those who participated in the ceremony of sealing the covenant (Neh 10:1-27) and a list of those who lived in Jerusalem and other cities (11:3-36). His interest in the priesthood is reflected in the list of priests and Levites who returned with Zerubbabel (12:1-9), of the high priests from Jeshua to Jaddua (vv 10-11), of the heads of the priestly families (vv 12-21), of the Levites and porters who served under the high priest (vv 22-26), and of the princes and priests who were present at the dedication of the rebuilt wall of Jerusalem (vv 31-42).<\/p>\n<p>The final genealogical record that must be mentioned is the genealogy from Adam to Saul (1 Chr 1–8), the longest section of genealogical material in the Bible. It is properly included with the genealogies compiled during the postexilic period, as the unknown chronicler (some think he was Ezra) prepared this list around 400 <span>BC<\/span> from extant records and documents available to him. His purpose seems to have been to conserve the purity of blood in the restored nation and to insist that the nation’s well-being depended on its faithfulness to God’s law.<\/p>\n<h5>The New Testament Period<\/h5>\n<p>The only genealogies of consequence in the NT are those concerning Jesus Christ in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38. <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GENEALOGY<\/h3>\n<p>Record or study of descent involving a tracing backward or forward of the ancestry of a nation, tribe, family, or individual. The Hebrews were not the only people in the ancient world to take an interest in maintaining genealogical records. The Sumerian king list of the third millennium <span>BC<\/span> contains records of the early rulers of Mesopotamia. In Babylonian records the word “son” was frequently used in the sense of “descendant of.” King Tirhakah of Egypt (c. 685 <span>BC<\/span>) referred to his “father,” Sesostris III, who lived some 1,200 years before him. Greeks and Romans also kept genealogical records. However, the biblical genealogies, especially those in Genesis and 1 Chronicles 1–9, are unique in the literature of the ancient Near East. Only at the beginning of the Islamic age are such broad genealogical records found. Even today among tribal Semites, such as Arab nomads, there is an intense interest in genealogy, and it is not unusual for an Arab to be able to recite accurately the names of his ancestors for 10 or 15 generations back, covering a period of several hundred years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TermsUsed\">Terms Used<\/p>\n<p>The word “genealogy” occurs only once as a noun in the Hebrew OT (Neh 7:5), where it refers to a register of those who returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel at the end of the exile. The verbal form of the same word is found a total of 20 times in 1—2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The terms “generations” and “book of the generations,” used in Genesis and elsewhere in the OT, convey the same idea. The equivalent NT terms are found in 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9 (“genealogies”) and Matthew 1:1, which refers to the “book of the genealogy” of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeofGenealogicalRecords\">Purpose of Genealogical Records<\/p>\n<p>The keeping of genealogical records in ancient Israel was an important activity and served a number of useful purposes. God’s promise of a land to Abraham and his descendants made such records necessary to establish and preserve the allotment of the land; a genealogical record served as evidence of a legitimate title to the ancestral property. Genealogies were essential for the preservation of the exclusive priesthood that had been established by the Mosaic law. In the time of Josephus every priest was supposed to be able to prove his descent.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most important reasons for keeping genealogical records was to establish and maintain the right of royal succession in Judah through the family of David. The belief that the Messiah would come from the Davidic house made such records even more important.<\/p>\n<p>Other purposes served by these family records included the imposition of military duty according to families (Nm 1:2-3). Position in camp and on the march from Egypt was determined by tribes and families (2:2, 17; 10:11-28). Also, God’s blessings were passed from one member of the family to his descendants (Gn 27). The stress placed on the purity of the congregation (Dt 7:1-4; 23:1-8) required complete family records, particularly in the postexilic period. With the insistence of Ezra and Nehemiah upon racial purity, and with the purging of foreign elements from among the people (Ezr 2:59-63; 10:9-44; Neh 13:23-28), written evidence of purity of descent became essential; interest in the compilation of genealogies became intense after the exile.<\/p>\n<p>Lineage was ordinarily traced through the male members of the family, with females being mentioned only rarely (e.g., Gn 11:29, Sarah and Milcah; 22:23, Rebekah; and Nm 26:33–27:11, where the property inheritance of the daughters of Zelophehad was involved). Matthew mentions three women: Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth; and in the second group alludes to Bathsheba (see discussion below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PrincipalGenealogicalListsintheBible\">Principal Genealogical Lists in the Bible<\/p>\n<p>The principal sources of genealogical material in the OT are found in Genesis, Numbers, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 1—2 Chronicles (which contain the greatest amount of genealogical material in the Bible), Ezra, and Nehemiah. The genealogies of Jesus Christ in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are the only NT records. Together they contain a genealogical record from Adam to Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Grouped together by historical periods, the following are the principal genealogical lists found in the Bible:<\/p>\n<h5>Before the Flood<\/h5>\n<p>Three lists are from this period. The first, found in Genesis 4:17-22, traces the descendants of Cain through seven generations and explains the hereditary origin of certain occupations and crafts. The second, Genesis 4:25-26, begins the account of the descendants of Seth, the posterity of Adam whose faithfulness to God is contrasted with the ungodly posterity of Cain. The third list, Genesis 5:1-32 (cf. 1 Chr 1:1-4), traces the descendants of Adam through Seth down to Noah and his sons at the time of the Flood.<\/p>\n<h5>From Noah to Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>Genesis 10:1-32 (cf. 1 Chr 1:4-23), frequently called the “table of nations,” contains a list of the nations descended from the sons of Noah (Shem, Ham, and Japheth). Genesis 11:10-26 (cf. 1 Chr 1:24-27) traces the descendants of Shem to the time of Abraham, and Genesis 11:27-30 (see also Gn 22:20-24) lists the descendants of Nahor, Abraham’s brother.<\/p>\n<h5>From Abraham to the Descent into Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The descendants of Abraham by Hagar, Sarah, and Keturah are found in Genesis 16:15, 21:1-3, and 25:1-4 (introducing the Arabs as descendants of Abraham; cf. 1 Chr 1:28-34). Genesis 19:37-38 links the Moabites and Ammonites to Abraham through his nephew Lot. A very important genealogical list during this period is that of the descendants of Jacob, giving the account of the parentage, birth, and naming of the founders of the 12 tribes of Israel (Gn 29:31–30:24; 35:16-26). Esau is acknowledged as the ancestor of the Edomites; his Edomite descendants are traced through his three wives (Gn 26:34; 36:1-43; 1 Chr 1:35-54). The list of Jacob’s family at the time he entered Egypt, numbering 70, is found in Genesis 46:1-27 (cf. Ex 6:14-16; Nm 26:1-51; 1 Chr 2–8). A partial list of the heads of the fathers’ houses of Reuben, Simeon, and Levi is found in Exodus 6:14-25; the chief purpose of this genealogy is to establish Aaron and Moses as members of Levi’s tribe.<\/p>\n<h5>From the Exodus to the Conquest of Canaan<\/h5>\n<p>While the tribes were still in the desert after leaving Egypt, a census was taken to determine the total number of Israelites (Nm 1:4-54; 2:2-33). During this same period, a genealogy of the family of Aaron was compiled, and a separate census was taken of the Levites (3:1-39). A list of the 12 spies who searched out the land and the tribes they represented is given in Numbers 13:4-16; the most important names on this list are Caleb and Joshua. Near the end of the wilderness wanderings, another census of the people was ordered; the total number was approximately the same as that of the first census almost 40 years earlier (26:4-51, 57-62). As the tribes neared the Promised Land, a list was prepared of the tribal representatives who would take part in the division of the land (34:16-29).<\/p>\n<h5>Period of the Kings<\/h5>\n<p>During the entire period of the monarchy, over 400 years, the only genealogical records of any consequence are those that pertain to David. His descendants are traced through 20 rulers who sat upon the throne of Judah until the nation fell to the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span> (1—2 Kgs; cf. 1 Chr 11:1—2 Chr 36:21). A list of David’s children is found in 2 Samuel 3:2-5 and 5:14-16 (cf. 1 Chr 3:1-9; 14:4-7). His mighty men, an elite group of soldiers, are named in 2 Samuel 23:8-39 (cf. 1 Chr 11:10-47). His recruits at Ziklag are recorded in 1 Chronicles 12:1-22. Those who were his musicians and doorkeepers when the ark was brought to Jerusalem are named in 1 Chronicles 15:1-24 (cf. 1 Chr 16:5-6, 37-43). David’s political and religious organization of the kingdom—including the Levites, priests, singers, porters and other administrative officials, and military officers—is found in 1 Chronicles 23–27. In spite of the literary activity associated with the reign of Solomon, the only genealogical record preserved from this period is that of Solomon’s princes and 12 officers (1 Kgs 4:1-19). The genealogy of one prophet is traced back four generations (Zep 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Postexilic Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the postexilic period, the keeping of genealogical records probably received its greatest impetus through the activity of Ezra and Nehemiah, primarily because of their insistence upon racial purity and the purging of foreign elements from the community. A list of the exiles who returned with Zerubbabel is found in Ezra 2:1-70 (cf. Neh 7:6-73, where the same list is found). A list of those who returned with Ezra is included in 8:1-20. Ezra’s own genealogy is also recorded (Ezr 7:5). There is a list of the Jews who married foreign women that included priests, Levites, singers, porters, and other Israelites (Ezr 10:18-44). Nehemiah 8:4-7 names the Levites and others who assisted Ezra when he read the law publicly. Nehemiah also contains a list of those who participated in the ceremony of sealing the covenant (Neh 10:1-27) and a list of those who lived in Jerusalem and other cities (11:3-36). His interest in the priesthood is reflected in the list of priests and Levites who returned with Zerubbabel (12:1-9), of the high priests from Jeshua to Jaddua (vv 10-11), of the heads of the priestly families (vv 12-21), of the Levites and porters who served under the high priest (vv 22-26), and of the princes and priests who were present at the dedication of the rebuilt wall of Jerusalem (vv 31-42).<\/p>\n<p>The final genealogical record that must be mentioned is the genealogy from Adam to Saul (1 Chr 1–8), the longest section of genealogical material in the Bible. It is properly included with the genealogies compiled during the postexilic period, as the unknown chronicler (some think he was Ezra) prepared this list around 400 <span>BC<\/span> from extant records and documents available to him. His purpose seems to have been to conserve the purity of blood in the restored nation and to insist that the nation’s well-being depended on its faithfulness to God’s law.<\/p>\n<h5>The New Testament Period<\/h5>\n<p>The only genealogies of consequence in the NT are those concerning Jesus Christ in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38. <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GENEALOGY Record or study of descent involving a tracing backward or forward of the ancestry of a nation, tribe, family, or individual. The Hebrews were not the only people in the ancient world to take an interest in maintaining genealogical records. The Sumerian king list of the third millennium BC contains records of the early rulers of Mesopotamia. In Babylonian records the word “son” was frequently used in the sense of “descendant of.” King Tirhakah of Egypt (c. 685 BC) referred to his “f...","summary_en":"GENEALOGY Record or study of descent involving a tracing backward or forward of the ancestry of a nation, tribe, family, or individual. The Hebrews were not the only people in the ancient world to take an interest in maintaining genealogical records. The Sumerian king list of the third millennium BC contains records of the early rulers of Mesopotamia. In Babylonian records the word “son” was frequently used in the sense of “descendant of.” King Tirhakah of Egypt (c. 685 BC) referred to his “f...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13508,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Genesis","title_en":"Book of Genesis","content_ro":"<h3>GENESIS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First book of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">bere’shith<\/span><em>,<\/em> “in the beginning.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Genesis is closely related to the authorship of the entire Pentateuch (lit. “five-volumed,” the first five books of the Bible, which in Hebrew are called the Torah). It is clear that the Bible regards the human author of these books as Moses. On several occasions the Lord commanded Moses to write down various things: “in a book” (Ex 17:14) “write these words” (34:27). The Pentateuch reports that “Moses wrote all the words of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:4); he wrote the itinerary of the exodus wanderings (Nm 33:2); “Moses wrote this law” (Dt 31:9). (Here it is not certain that all five books are meant, but it must refer to at least the greater part of Deuteronomy.) In Exodus 24:7 it is said that Moses read the Book of the Covenant, which he must have just completed.<\/p>\n<p>The rest of the OT bears witness to the writing of the Pentateuch by Moses. David referred to “the law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3). In the time of Josiah, there was found in the temple the “Book of the Law of the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . given through Moses” (2 Chr 34:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Day by day Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of God” (Neh 8:18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus refers to “the book of Moses” (Mk 12:26; Lk 20:37) and otherwise mentions the commands or statements of Moses (Mt 8:4; 19:8; Mk 7:10; cf. Lk 16:31; 24:44). The Jews also quoted from the Torah as coming from Moses, and Jesus did not contradict them.<\/p>\n<p>Of Genesis in particular, it may be said that Moses had the opportunity and ability to write the book. He could have written it during his years in Egypt or while exiled with the Kenites. As the recognized leader of the Israelites, he would have had access to, or perhaps even custody of, the records that Jacob brought from Canaan. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22) and probably could have written in several languages and in several scripts (hieroglyphic, cuneiform, Old Hebrew). Although Moses was admirably fitted for the task of writing, one must remember that he was not putting together a human composition but was writing under the inspiration of God (2 Pt 1:21). We may with confidence conclude that Moses was the human author of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>The liberal view of the authorship of Genesis is that the book is an editorial composite—a view first put forward by a French physician, Jean Astruc, who suggested that the different names for God indicated different documents or sources for the writing of the book. The German higher critics expanded the view of the use of documents in the writing of Genesis and developed it into the Graf-Wellhausen-Kuenen, or Documentary, Hypothesis, which may also be called the JEDP theory of the authorship of the book. This view holds that there were four basic documents: (1) J, which uses the name YHWH (Jehovah or Yahweh) for God, dates from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> and comes from Judah; (2) E uses the name Elohim, dates from the eighth century, and comes from the northern kingdom; (3) D is Deuteronomy and is supposed to come from the time of Josiah, about 621 <span>BC<\/span>; and (4) P is the priestly element, which deals with matters of the priesthood and ritual, dating to the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> or later. Some may date portions of Genesis as late as the Hellenistic period. According to this theory, the various documents were blended together by editors, so that there was a JE, JED, and so on.<\/p>\n<p>The science of archaeology discredited many of the extreme postulations of these critics, and the work of W. F. Albright and his followers did much to restore confidence in the historicity of Genesis. Within the last several decades, the patriarchal narratives and the account of Joseph have again come under strong attack, but these views are extreme, and much of the evidence adduced by Albright and earlier scholars like R. D. Wilson, W. H. Green, and others still has validity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The date of the book is also a matter of debate. Even among those who accept Mosaic authorship there is debate as to when Moses lived. Based on the biblical data, Moses should have lived in the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Jgs 11:26; 1 Kgs 6:1), but many scholars incline toward a 13th-century date. As outlined above, the liberal view of the date of Genesis would be from the ninth to the fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>, with the final editing coming around the fifth century or perhaps even later.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Genesis sketches the origin of many things: the universe, the earth, plants, animals, and mankind. It gives the beginnings of human institutions, professions, and crafts. It describes the origin of sin and death, and illustrates the insidious working of Satan in human life. Above all, Genesis relates the beginning of the history of redemption with the announcement of a Redeemer who was to come (Gn 3:15). It names the early progenitors in the lineage of the Messiah and the beginning of the Hebrew people through whom the Bible and the Savior came. Genesis also gives a selective history of people and events as viewed from the perspective of the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The book is divided into 11 parts of uneven length, each set off by the expression “these are the generations [descendants, history] of” (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1; 37:2). Only three times does the formula coincide with the first verse of a chapter. Usually called a heading or superscription, the expression serves as a kind of link between what precedes and what follows.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Creation (1:1–2:25)<\/h5>\n<p>These two chapters have been a scientific-theological battleground for many years, as researchers and students have tried to probe the origins of the universe and of life. Much of the evidence is not subject to scientific scrutiny, for science by definition requires that the evidence must be reproducible by experiment.<\/p>\n<p>The statement of Genesis 1:1 remains the grandest, most precise, and most accurate statement of origins: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He did this <em>ex nihilo<\/em> (“out of nothing”) by his word (Heb 11:3); he spoke the word of command and it was done (Gn 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20; Ps 33:6, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The date of the beginning is unknown. Uniformitarian cosmogonists (students of the origins of the universe who believe that natural events have always followed a uniform pattern; cf. 2 Pt 3:3-7) have speculated that the beginning of the universe was billions of years ago. But some creationists posit a world thousands of years old.<\/p>\n<p>To accommodate geological ages and the existence of extinct animals, some interpreters have proposed a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, with Genesis 1:2–2:3 representing a second or new creation. But this is conjecture. So is the idea that each day represents a geological age.<\/p>\n<p>As the text stands, there is a correlation between the first three days and the second three days. Day one saw the creation of light; day four, the light bearers. Day two was the time of the creation of the firmament (better, “expanse”), which divided the waters; day five, birds and swarming water creatures. On day three, God made the dry land and plants; on day six he created the land animals and man. He made man in the image of God (Gn 1:26), “a little less than God” (Ps 8:5), and gave him dominion over the earth. He made everything “according to their kinds,” so that each kind is distinct and unique. The perfection of his work is affirmed in that “God saw that it was good” (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21; “very good,” v 31). The seventh day was a time of cessation from the activity of creating and served as a type for mankind’s day of rest (2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Critical scholarship eyes 2:4-25 as a doublet in conflict with Genesis 1:1–2:3. To conservative scholars, the second chapter is the same account from a different perspective. Chapter 1 gives the Creation from the standpoint of sequence; chapter 2 shows it in view of the centrality of mankind in God’s creative work.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 gives details of the creation of man of “dust from the ground” (v 7) and woman from a rib of the man (vv 21-22). She was created to be “a companion who will help him” (vv 18-20). They were created as mature adults, with the gift of speech and with great intelligence. Adam had imagination and vocabulary sufficient for naming all of the animal species (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Garden of Eden is given (vv 10-14). Two of the four rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, can be identified with certainty. So man lived in this beautiful garden in the bliss of innocence.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Humankind from Eden to Babel (3:1–11:26)<\/h5>\n<h6>The Fall<\/h6>\n<p>The loss of Eden and the break in fellowship with God is the saddest chapter in human history. The serpent, the devil, approached Eve with the same philosophy he always uses: doubt of God’s word (Gn 3:1), denial of death (v 4), and the suggestion of equality with God (v 5). He gained access to her will by deceiving her with the promise that the fruit would make her as wise as God is (Gn 3:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:16). Eve was deceived, but when she offered the fruit to Adam, he took it willingly, knowing what he was doing (Gn 3:6; cf. 1 Tm 2:14). Later, he tried to blame God for giving him the wife who gave him the fruit (Gn 3:12). Fellowship with God was broken (v 8), yet God came seeking Adam and found him.<\/p>\n<p>With sin came judgment, and the Lord pronounced righteous judgment on the serpent, the woman, and the man. The earth was also “subjected to frustration” and now groans as it awaits renewal (Rom 8:21-22). God gave hope to man and a promise of a Redeemer (Gn 3:15), who was to bruise the serpent’s head. Adam and Eve were forced out of the Garden, and it was made inaccessible to them.<\/p>\n<p>The impatience of humankind is shown in Eve’s expectation that her son Cain was the promised Deliverer. Instead, he developed a wrong-hearted attitude toward God and became so jealous of his younger brother that he murdered him. Apprehended by God and confronted with his crime, Cain showed only self-pity and went east from Eden, where he built a city (4:1-16). Chapter 4 closes with another contrast: the brazen Lamech, who called for vengeance, while others began to call upon the name of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>The Generations of Adam<\/h6>\n<p>This genealogical table (5:1-32) brings humankind to the time of Noah and the Flood. The longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs seems very striking to us, but one must remember that the earth had not yet been subjected to pollution and that the effects of sin on the human race were still nominal. The refrain “and he died” reminds us of man’s mortality. For Enoch, however, there was something better: “He enjoyed a close relationship with God throughout his life. Then, suddenly, he disappeared because God took him” (5:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>The Flood<\/h6>\n<p>With increased population came an eruption of sin (6:1-5). As men multiplied, so did their corruption. The universal condemnation of verse 5 shows a world ripe for judgment. Noah, however, “found favor with the <span>Lord<\/span>,” for he was a righteous and blameless man who walked with God (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord planned to annihilate the human race, but he determined to save Noah and his family. Intending to flood the earth, God instructed Noah to build an ark. Noah was directed to take animals aboard the ark, two by two, male and female, for the preservation of each species. When all was in readiness, the Flood came: “the underground waters burst forth on the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. The highest mountains were covered, and life outside the ark perished. “But God remembered Noah” and sent a wind to evaporate the waters (8:1). Eventually the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (v 4). Noah made a sacrifice to the Lord, and the Lord determined that he would never again bring such destruction upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Flood is another of God’s acts that has been much debated. Many have argued for a local flood, which affected only part of Mesopotamia. Archaeologists have pointed to various flood strata in the excavation of Mesopotamian city-mounds as evidence for the account of the flood and have cited the various flood stories from that area as the source of the Genesis record. The epic of Gilgamesh gives an interesting tale of this hero, who went on a mission to visit Utnapishtim, the cuneiform Noah, in quest of eternal life. The flood story told by Utnapishtim has many parallels to Genesis, but there are greater contrasts, which demonstrate that the Bible preserves the true account.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Genesis account and the references to it in the NT (cf. 2 Pt 3:6) favor the view that the deluge was not a minor episode in the Tigris-Euphrates area but was an unprecedented worldwide catastrophe. Christian geologists affirm that the Flood had far-reaching effects on the earth itself. Flood stories are almost universally known, lending support to the conclusion that the Flood covered the whole earth. Following the Flood, God blessed Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. God made a covenant with Noah, promising that he would never again send a worldwide flood. As a sign of this, he established the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>Noah was the first tiller of the soil, and he planted a vineyard (9:20). Noah became drunk from wine he made and lay uncovered in his tent. Ham saw him and reported this to his brothers, who discreetly covered him. Ham and his son Canaan were cursed; Shem and Japheth were blessed.<\/p>\n<h6>The History of the Nations<\/h6>\n<p>“This is the history of the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the three sons of Noah. Many children were born to them after the Flood” (10:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). This chapter lists the descendants of Noah’s three sons, in the order of Japheth (vv 2-5), Ham (vv 6-20), and Shem (vv 21-31). Many of the names of their descendants are preserved in tribes and nations of the world.<\/p>\n<h6>The Tower of Babel<\/h6>\n<p>The building of the Tower of Babel (“Gate of God”) illustrates man’s perversity and his tendency to want independence from God. The desire of man to displace God follows the fateful example of Lucifer and is a basic tenet of many cults. God thwarted the designs of the builders of Babel by confusing their languages, so that the project came to a halt (11:1-9). The site of this tower is not known with certainty. Some associate it with Birs Nimrud, not far from the ruins of the city of Babylon. Genesis 11:10-25 picks up the line of Shem and carries it down to Terah, the father of Abram.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Abraham (11:27–25:10) and Isaac (21:1–28:5)<\/h5>\n<p>Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees, a prosperous city. The city had an imposing ziggurat (temple-tower), with many temples, storehouses, and residences. Abram and Sarai, his half sister and wife, went with his father to Haran in Syria, which like Ur was a center of the worship of the moon god, Sin (or Annar).<\/p>\n<h6>Abram’s Call<\/h6>\n<p>The call of God came to Abram directing him to leave his relatives and move to a land that the Lord would show him (12:1; cf. Acts 7:2-3). Abram obeyed. At the age of 75, he, Sarai, and his nephew Lot left Haran and went to Shechem, where the Lord appeared to him and promised that land to his descendants.<\/p>\n<p>Famine drove Abram down to Egypt (Gn 12:10-20). Because of Sarai’s beauty, he feared that someone might kill him to get her, so he passed her off as his sister. She was taken into the pharaoh’s harem. When the Lord plagued Pharaoh because of this, Abram’s lie was discovered and Sarai was returned to him.<\/p>\n<h6>Abram and Lot<\/h6>\n<p>Abram and Lot returned to Canaan, where strife broke out between Abram’s herdsmen and those of Lot. Abram suggested that they should separate, and he gave Lot the choice of territory. Lot chose the well-watered Jordan Valley and the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah (ch 13).<\/p>\n<h6>The Invasion of the Four Kings from the East<\/h6>\n<p>The four kings who invaded along the King’s Highway in Transjordan cannot be identified with certainty. Those kings were successful in their attack against the five cities of the plain, and they moved off with much booty and many captives, including Lot. Abram took 318 retainers, born in his household, and set off after them. By surprise attack, Abram recovered both Lot and the loot. On his return he was met by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem, to whom Abram paid tithes (ch 14).<\/p>\n<h6>The Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord promised Abram a son as heir, and in an impressive nighttime ceremony, God made a covenant with Abram and promised him the land from the River of Egypt (Wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates (ch 15). Because of her own barrenness, Sarai gave her Egyptian maid, Hagar, to Abram. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arab peoples. When trouble arose between the women, Sarai sent Hagar away, which was her right according to Near Eastern customs (as illustrated by the Nuzi tablets). God showed mercy to Hagar and promised that she would have a great posterity (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>God repeated his promise to Abram concerning his descendants and changed the names of Abram (“exalted father”) and Sarai to Abraham (“father of many”) and Sarah (“princess”). A covenant sign of circumcision was given to Abraham (ch 17). This operation had already been practiced among the Egyptians for several centuries.<\/p>\n<h6>The Destruction of the Cities of the Plain<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord and two angels appeared to Abraham and announced the birth of the promised heir within a year, as well as proclaimed the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, concerning which Abraham bargained with God (18:22-33). Lot and his immediate family were rescued from Sodom, and the cities were destroyed by God with brimstone and fire (19:24-25). Lot’s two daughters, wishing to preserve their family line, got their father drunk and had sexual relations with him. Moab and Ammon, enemies of Israel in later times, were the result.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 20:1-18, Abraham again represented Sarah as his sister and got into trouble with Abimelech, king of Gerar.<\/p>\n<h6>Isaac<\/h6>\n<p>When Isaac was born (21:1-3), trouble again broke out between Sarah and Hagar. Hagar was driven out a second time, and once more was befriended by the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>A disagreement arose between Abraham and Abimelech concerning a well, but they made a covenant of peace at Beersheba (21:25-34).<\/p>\n<p>God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah, which probably is the same site David later bought from Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-25), the place where the temple was to stand. As Abraham was about to use the knife, God called to him and showed him a ram caught in a thicket. Isaac was freed and the animal was sacrificed in his stead.<\/p>\n<p>Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite (ch 23), in a transaction typical of Near Eastern business dealings. To find a wife for Isaac, Abraham sent his servant Eliezer back to the area of Haran, and the Lord directed Eliezer to Rebekah (ch 24).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 records the marriage of Abraham to Keturah, who bore him a number of children. Abraham died at the age of 175 years and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Jacob and Esau (25:19–37:1)<\/h5>\n<p>Rebekah gave birth to twin sons, Esau and Jacob. When the boys were grown, Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a meal of red pottage (25:27-34).<\/p>\n<p>When famine came to the land, Isaac went to Gerar, as his father had done (ch 20), and repeated his father’s lie by calling his wife his sister (26:1-11). Trouble arose with the Philistines over wells, but Isaac was a peaceable man and preferred digging new wells rather than fighting over old ones (vv 17-33).<\/p>\n<p>In Isaac’s old age, when his sight had failed, Rebekah connived with Jacob to trick Isaac into giving to Jacob the blessing of the firstborn, which was rightfully Esau’s. This oral blessing had legal validity and was irrevocable, according to the ancient Nuzi tablets. Fearing for Jacob’s life at the hands of Esau, Rebekah arranged to send Jacob to Haran to find a wife from among her own people. At Bethel, God appeared to Jacob in a dream of a ladder leading up to heaven; God renewed with Jacob the promise made to Abraham and Isaac (28:10-22).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob reached Haran, found his uncle Laban, and was employed by him (ch 29). His wages for seven years of labor were to be Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel, as his wife. But Laban substituted Leah, so that Jacob had to work another seven years for Rachel. The Lord prospered Jacob, but he continually had difficulties with Laban. The Lord directed Jacob back to Canaan (31:3), so he left secretly with his wives, children, and property. Laban pursued them because his household gods were missing (possession of these “gods” made the holder heir to the owner’s estate, according to Nuzi custom). Rachel had taken them but successfully concealed them from her father, and Laban went back to Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Fearing a meeting with Esau as they passed through Edom, Jacob sent gifts to his brother and divided his own party into two camps for security. On this return journey, Jacob had an unexpected wrestling bout with the Angel of the Lord, and he was left with a limp and a new name, Israel (ch 32).<\/p>\n<p>The meeting with Esau was friendly, and Jacob went on to Shechem (ch 33), where his sons killed the male Shechemites because of the rape of their sister Dinah (ch 34). God told Jacob to go to Bethel and build an altar to the Lord. All idols of foreign gods were buried (35:1-4). At Bethel, God reaffirmed his promise of a posterity and the land (vv 9-15). Rachel died on the way to Bethlehem, while giving birth to Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th and last son. Isaac died at Hebron at age 180 and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by Esau and Jacob.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 36 records “the generations of Esau” (v 1). Here Esau is also named Edom (“Red”; cf. 25:30).<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Joseph (37:2–50:26)<\/h5>\n<p>Joseph was Jacob’s favorite son and thus incurred the jealousy of his brothers. This was heightened by Joseph’s dreams of lordship over them. Their resentment of Joseph came to a climax when Jacob gave Joseph a beautiful coat. The brothers determined to kill Joseph, but they compromised by selling him to a caravan of merchants, who took him to Egypt and sold him as a slave to Potiphar, an Egyptian captain of the guard (37:36; 39:1).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 38 relates a historic case of levirate marriage. Judah failed to give his widowed daughter-in-law to his third son. She deceived him into fathering twin sons and forced him to acknowledge his faults. The elder son, Perez, is named in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord blessed Joseph, who soon was put in charge of Potiphar’s household (Gn 39). The young man attracted the attention of Potiphar’s wife, who, after many attempts to seduce him, at last accused him of attempted rape. Sentenced on this charge, Joseph met with favor in prison, where he had opportunity to interpret dreams for two of the pharaoh’s servants (ch 40). When the king had dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret, Joseph was summoned from jail. Joseph told Pharaoh that the dreams meant seven years of plenty, followed by seven years of famine. Joseph was then exalted to the office of vizier, or prime minister, second only to the king, and put in charge of the administration of the land (41:37-44).<\/p>\n<p>When the famine came to Palestine, Jacob sent his sons to Egypt to purchase grain. Joseph recognized his brothers but did not reveal his identity to them. Joseph put them to the test by accusing them of being spies (42:9), by keeping one of the brothers (Simeon) hostage (v 19), and by demanding that if they came to Egypt again, they must bring their youngest brother with them (42:20; 43:3). The famine became so severe in Canaan (43:1) that Jacob at last allowed Benjamin to go with his brothers to Egypt. The brothers were again set up by Joseph, who had his silver cup put into Benjamin’s grain sack and then had him apprehended as a thief (ch 44).<\/p>\n<p>At this point Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers (45:4-15) and there was much rejoicing. Joseph pointed out that it was God who had sent him to Egypt (vv 7-8), in order to preserve the lives of all the family. Jacob was then sent for (46:1), and Joseph met him in the land of Goshen (46:28-29). The Israelites were assigned land in the region of Goshen, where they prospered (47:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jacob’s final illness, Joseph brought his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to his father for his blessing. Jacob gave the primary blessing to the second-born, Ephraim (48:13-20). Jacob blessed each of his own sons and then died at the age of at least 130 years. Joseph arranged for Jacob’s body to be prepared for burial according to Egyptian custom (50:2-3). After the burial of their father in the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, Joseph’s brothers worried about vengeance, but Joseph declared, “As far as I am concerned, God turned into good what you meant for evil. He brought me to the high position I have today so I could save the lives of many people” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph died at age 110 with the prophetic request that when the Israelites went up from Egypt they would take his bones with them (50:25; cf. Ex 13:19; Jos 24:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Adam (Person); Covenant; Creation; Eve; Fall of Man; Flood, The; Isaac; Jacob #1; Joseph #1; Nations; Noah #1; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GENESIS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First book of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">bere’shith<\/span><em>,<\/em> “in the beginning.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Genesis is closely related to the authorship of the entire Pentateuch (lit. “five-volumed,” the first five books of the Bible, which in Hebrew are called the Torah). It is clear that the Bible regards the human author of these books as Moses. On several occasions the Lord commanded Moses to write down various things: “in a book” (Ex 17:14) “write these words” (34:27). The Pentateuch reports that “Moses wrote all the words of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:4); he wrote the itinerary of the exodus wanderings (Nm 33:2); “Moses wrote this law” (Dt 31:9). (Here it is not certain that all five books are meant, but it must refer to at least the greater part of Deuteronomy.) In Exodus 24:7 it is said that Moses read the Book of the Covenant, which he must have just completed.<\/p>\n<p>The rest of the OT bears witness to the writing of the Pentateuch by Moses. David referred to “the law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3). In the time of Josiah, there was found in the temple the “Book of the Law of the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . given through Moses” (2 Chr 34:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Day by day Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of God” (Neh 8:18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus refers to “the book of Moses” (Mk 12:26; Lk 20:37) and otherwise mentions the commands or statements of Moses (Mt 8:4; 19:8; Mk 7:10; cf. Lk 16:31; 24:44). The Jews also quoted from the Torah as coming from Moses, and Jesus did not contradict them.<\/p>\n<p>Of Genesis in particular, it may be said that Moses had the opportunity and ability to write the book. He could have written it during his years in Egypt or while exiled with the Kenites. As the recognized leader of the Israelites, he would have had access to, or perhaps even custody of, the records that Jacob brought from Canaan. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22) and probably could have written in several languages and in several scripts (hieroglyphic, cuneiform, Old Hebrew). Although Moses was admirably fitted for the task of writing, one must remember that he was not putting together a human composition but was writing under the inspiration of God (2 Pt 1:21). We may with confidence conclude that Moses was the human author of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>The liberal view of the authorship of Genesis is that the book is an editorial composite—a view first put forward by a French physician, Jean Astruc, who suggested that the different names for God indicated different documents or sources for the writing of the book. The German higher critics expanded the view of the use of documents in the writing of Genesis and developed it into the Graf-Wellhausen-Kuenen, or Documentary, Hypothesis, which may also be called the JEDP theory of the authorship of the book. This view holds that there were four basic documents: (1) J, which uses the name YHWH (Jehovah or Yahweh) for God, dates from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> and comes from Judah; (2) E uses the name Elohim, dates from the eighth century, and comes from the northern kingdom; (3) D is Deuteronomy and is supposed to come from the time of Josiah, about 621 <span>BC<\/span>; and (4) P is the priestly element, which deals with matters of the priesthood and ritual, dating to the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> or later. Some may date portions of Genesis as late as the Hellenistic period. According to this theory, the various documents were blended together by editors, so that there was a JE, JED, and so on.<\/p>\n<p>The science of archaeology discredited many of the extreme postulations of these critics, and the work of W. F. Albright and his followers did much to restore confidence in the historicity of Genesis. Within the last several decades, the patriarchal narratives and the account of Joseph have again come under strong attack, but these views are extreme, and much of the evidence adduced by Albright and earlier scholars like R. D. Wilson, W. H. Green, and others still has validity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The date of the book is also a matter of debate. Even among those who accept Mosaic authorship there is debate as to when Moses lived. Based on the biblical data, Moses should have lived in the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Jgs 11:26; 1 Kgs 6:1), but many scholars incline toward a 13th-century date. As outlined above, the liberal view of the date of Genesis would be from the ninth to the fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>, with the final editing coming around the fifth century or perhaps even later.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Genesis sketches the origin of many things: the universe, the earth, plants, animals, and mankind. It gives the beginnings of human institutions, professions, and crafts. It describes the origin of sin and death, and illustrates the insidious working of Satan in human life. Above all, Genesis relates the beginning of the history of redemption with the announcement of a Redeemer who was to come (Gn 3:15). It names the early progenitors in the lineage of the Messiah and the beginning of the Hebrew people through whom the Bible and the Savior came. Genesis also gives a selective history of people and events as viewed from the perspective of the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The book is divided into 11 parts of uneven length, each set off by the expression “these are the generations [descendants, history] of” (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1; 37:2). Only three times does the formula coincide with the first verse of a chapter. Usually called a heading or superscription, the expression serves as a kind of link between what precedes and what follows.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Creation (1:1–2:25)<\/h5>\n<p>These two chapters have been a scientific-theological battleground for many years, as researchers and students have tried to probe the origins of the universe and of life. Much of the evidence is not subject to scientific scrutiny, for science by definition requires that the evidence must be reproducible by experiment.<\/p>\n<p>The statement of Genesis 1:1 remains the grandest, most precise, and most accurate statement of origins: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He did this <em>ex nihilo<\/em> (“out of nothing”) by his word (Heb 11:3); he spoke the word of command and it was done (Gn 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20; Ps 33:6, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The date of the beginning is unknown. Uniformitarian cosmogonists (students of the origins of the universe who believe that natural events have always followed a uniform pattern; cf. 2 Pt 3:3-7) have speculated that the beginning of the universe was billions of years ago. But some creationists posit a world thousands of years old.<\/p>\n<p>To accommodate geological ages and the existence of extinct animals, some interpreters have proposed a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, with Genesis 1:2–2:3 representing a second or new creation. But this is conjecture. So is the idea that each day represents a geological age.<\/p>\n<p>As the text stands, there is a correlation between the first three days and the second three days. Day one saw the creation of light; day four, the light bearers. Day two was the time of the creation of the firmament (better, “expanse”), which divided the waters; day five, birds and swarming water creatures. On day three, God made the dry land and plants; on day six he created the land animals and man. He made man in the image of God (Gn 1:26), “a little less than God” (Ps 8:5), and gave him dominion over the earth. He made everything “according to their kinds,” so that each kind is distinct and unique. The perfection of his work is affirmed in that “God saw that it was good” (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21; “very good,” v 31). The seventh day was a time of cessation from the activity of creating and served as a type for mankind’s day of rest (2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Critical scholarship eyes 2:4-25 as a doublet in conflict with Genesis 1:1–2:3. To conservative scholars, the second chapter is the same account from a different perspective. Chapter 1 gives the Creation from the standpoint of sequence; chapter 2 shows it in view of the centrality of mankind in God’s creative work.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 gives details of the creation of man of “dust from the ground” (v 7) and woman from a rib of the man (vv 21-22). She was created to be “a companion who will help him” (vv 18-20). They were created as mature adults, with the gift of speech and with great intelligence. Adam had imagination and vocabulary sufficient for naming all of the animal species (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Garden of Eden is given (vv 10-14). Two of the four rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, can be identified with certainty. So man lived in this beautiful garden in the bliss of innocence.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Humankind from Eden to Babel (3:1–11:26)<\/h5>\n<h6>The Fall<\/h6>\n<p>The loss of Eden and the break in fellowship with God is the saddest chapter in human history. The serpent, the devil, approached Eve with the same philosophy he always uses: doubt of God’s word (Gn 3:1), denial of death (v 4), and the suggestion of equality with God (v 5). He gained access to her will by deceiving her with the promise that the fruit would make her as wise as God is (Gn 3:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:16). Eve was deceived, but when she offered the fruit to Adam, he took it willingly, knowing what he was doing (Gn 3:6; cf. 1 Tm 2:14). Later, he tried to blame God for giving him the wife who gave him the fruit (Gn 3:12). Fellowship with God was broken (v 8), yet God came seeking Adam and found him.<\/p>\n<p>With sin came judgment, and the Lord pronounced righteous judgment on the serpent, the woman, and the man. The earth was also “subjected to frustration” and now groans as it awaits renewal (Rom 8:21-22). God gave hope to man and a promise of a Redeemer (Gn 3:15), who was to bruise the serpent’s head. Adam and Eve were forced out of the Garden, and it was made inaccessible to them.<\/p>\n<p>The impatience of humankind is shown in Eve’s expectation that her son Cain was the promised Deliverer. Instead, he developed a wrong-hearted attitude toward God and became so jealous of his younger brother that he murdered him. Apprehended by God and confronted with his crime, Cain showed only self-pity and went east from Eden, where he built a city (4:1-16). Chapter 4 closes with another contrast: the brazen Lamech, who called for vengeance, while others began to call upon the name of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>The Generations of Adam<\/h6>\n<p>This genealogical table (5:1-32) brings humankind to the time of Noah and the Flood. The longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs seems very striking to us, but one must remember that the earth had not yet been subjected to pollution and that the effects of sin on the human race were still nominal. The refrain “and he died” reminds us of man’s mortality. For Enoch, however, there was something better: “He enjoyed a close relationship with God throughout his life. Then, suddenly, he disappeared because God took him” (5:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>The Flood<\/h6>\n<p>With increased population came an eruption of sin (6:1-5). As men multiplied, so did their corruption. The universal condemnation of verse 5 shows a world ripe for judgment. Noah, however, “found favor with the <span>Lord<\/span>,” for he was a righteous and blameless man who walked with God (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord planned to annihilate the human race, but he determined to save Noah and his family. Intending to flood the earth, God instructed Noah to build an ark. Noah was directed to take animals aboard the ark, two by two, male and female, for the preservation of each species. When all was in readiness, the Flood came: “the underground waters burst forth on the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. The highest mountains were covered, and life outside the ark perished. “But God remembered Noah” and sent a wind to evaporate the waters (8:1). Eventually the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (v 4). Noah made a sacrifice to the Lord, and the Lord determined that he would never again bring such destruction upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Flood is another of God’s acts that has been much debated. Many have argued for a local flood, which affected only part of Mesopotamia. Archaeologists have pointed to various flood strata in the excavation of Mesopotamian city-mounds as evidence for the account of the flood and have cited the various flood stories from that area as the source of the Genesis record. The epic of Gilgamesh gives an interesting tale of this hero, who went on a mission to visit Utnapishtim, the cuneiform Noah, in quest of eternal life. The flood story told by Utnapishtim has many parallels to Genesis, but there are greater contrasts, which demonstrate that the Bible preserves the true account.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Genesis account and the references to it in the NT (cf. 2 Pt 3:6) favor the view that the deluge was not a minor episode in the Tigris-Euphrates area but was an unprecedented worldwide catastrophe. Christian geologists affirm that the Flood had far-reaching effects on the earth itself. Flood stories are almost universally known, lending support to the conclusion that the Flood covered the whole earth. Following the Flood, God blessed Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. God made a covenant with Noah, promising that he would never again send a worldwide flood. As a sign of this, he established the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>Noah was the first tiller of the soil, and he planted a vineyard (9:20). Noah became drunk from wine he made and lay uncovered in his tent. Ham saw him and reported this to his brothers, who discreetly covered him. Ham and his son Canaan were cursed; Shem and Japheth were blessed.<\/p>\n<h6>The History of the Nations<\/h6>\n<p>“This is the history of the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the three sons of Noah. Many children were born to them after the Flood” (10:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). This chapter lists the descendants of Noah’s three sons, in the order of Japheth (vv 2-5), Ham (vv 6-20), and Shem (vv 21-31). Many of the names of their descendants are preserved in tribes and nations of the world.<\/p>\n<h6>The Tower of Babel<\/h6>\n<p>The building of the Tower of Babel (“Gate of God”) illustrates man’s perversity and his tendency to want independence from God. The desire of man to displace God follows the fateful example of Lucifer and is a basic tenet of many cults. God thwarted the designs of the builders of Babel by confusing their languages, so that the project came to a halt (11:1-9). The site of this tower is not known with certainty. Some associate it with Birs Nimrud, not far from the ruins of the city of Babylon. Genesis 11:10-25 picks up the line of Shem and carries it down to Terah, the father of Abram.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Abraham (11:27–25:10) and Isaac (21:1–28:5)<\/h5>\n<p>Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees, a prosperous city. The city had an imposing ziggurat (temple-tower), with many temples, storehouses, and residences. Abram and Sarai, his half sister and wife, went with his father to Haran in Syria, which like Ur was a center of the worship of the moon god, Sin (or Annar).<\/p>\n<h6>Abram’s Call<\/h6>\n<p>The call of God came to Abram directing him to leave his relatives and move to a land that the Lord would show him (12:1; cf. Acts 7:2-3). Abram obeyed. At the age of 75, he, Sarai, and his nephew Lot left Haran and went to Shechem, where the Lord appeared to him and promised that land to his descendants.<\/p>\n<p>Famine drove Abram down to Egypt (Gn 12:10-20). Because of Sarai’s beauty, he feared that someone might kill him to get her, so he passed her off as his sister. She was taken into the pharaoh’s harem. When the Lord plagued Pharaoh because of this, Abram’s lie was discovered and Sarai was returned to him.<\/p>\n<h6>Abram and Lot<\/h6>\n<p>Abram and Lot returned to Canaan, where strife broke out between Abram’s herdsmen and those of Lot. Abram suggested that they should separate, and he gave Lot the choice of territory. Lot chose the well-watered Jordan Valley and the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah (ch 13).<\/p>\n<h6>The Invasion of the Four Kings from the East<\/h6>\n<p>The four kings who invaded along the King’s Highway in Transjordan cannot be identified with certainty. Those kings were successful in their attack against the five cities of the plain, and they moved off with much booty and many captives, including Lot. Abram took 318 retainers, born in his household, and set off after them. By surprise attack, Abram recovered both Lot and the loot. On his return he was met by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem, to whom Abram paid tithes (ch 14).<\/p>\n<h6>The Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord promised Abram a son as heir, and in an impressive nighttime ceremony, God made a covenant with Abram and promised him the land from the River of Egypt (Wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates (ch 15). Because of her own barrenness, Sarai gave her Egyptian maid, Hagar, to Abram. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arab peoples. When trouble arose between the women, Sarai sent Hagar away, which was her right according to Near Eastern customs (as illustrated by the Nuzi tablets). God showed mercy to Hagar and promised that she would have a great posterity (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>God repeated his promise to Abram concerning his descendants and changed the names of Abram (“exalted father”) and Sarai to Abraham (“father of many”) and Sarah (“princess”). A covenant sign of circumcision was given to Abraham (ch 17). This operation had already been practiced among the Egyptians for several centuries.<\/p>\n<h6>The Destruction of the Cities of the Plain<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord and two angels appeared to Abraham and announced the birth of the promised heir within a year, as well as proclaimed the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, concerning which Abraham bargained with God (18:22-33). Lot and his immediate family were rescued from Sodom, and the cities were destroyed by God with brimstone and fire (19:24-25). Lot’s two daughters, wishing to preserve their family line, got their father drunk and had sexual relations with him. Moab and Ammon, enemies of Israel in later times, were the result.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 20:1-18, Abraham again represented Sarah as his sister and got into trouble with Abimelech, king of Gerar.<\/p>\n<h6>Isaac<\/h6>\n<p>When Isaac was born (21:1-3), trouble again broke out between Sarah and Hagar. Hagar was driven out a second time, and once more was befriended by the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>A disagreement arose between Abraham and Abimelech concerning a well, but they made a covenant of peace at Beersheba (21:25-34).<\/p>\n<p>God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah, which probably is the same site David later bought from Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-25), the place where the temple was to stand. As Abraham was about to use the knife, God called to him and showed him a ram caught in a thicket. Isaac was freed and the animal was sacrificed in his stead.<\/p>\n<p>Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite (ch 23), in a transaction typical of Near Eastern business dealings. To find a wife for Isaac, Abraham sent his servant Eliezer back to the area of Haran, and the Lord directed Eliezer to Rebekah (ch 24).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 records the marriage of Abraham to Keturah, who bore him a number of children. Abraham died at the age of 175 years and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Jacob and Esau (25:19–37:1)<\/h5>\n<p>Rebekah gave birth to twin sons, Esau and Jacob. When the boys were grown, Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a meal of red pottage (25:27-34).<\/p>\n<p>When famine came to the land, Isaac went to Gerar, as his father had done (ch 20), and repeated his father’s lie by calling his wife his sister (26:1-11). Trouble arose with the Philistines over wells, but Isaac was a peaceable man and preferred digging new wells rather than fighting over old ones (vv 17-33).<\/p>\n<p>In Isaac’s old age, when his sight had failed, Rebekah connived with Jacob to trick Isaac into giving to Jacob the blessing of the firstborn, which was rightfully Esau’s. This oral blessing had legal validity and was irrevocable, according to the ancient Nuzi tablets. Fearing for Jacob’s life at the hands of Esau, Rebekah arranged to send Jacob to Haran to find a wife from among her own people. At Bethel, God appeared to Jacob in a dream of a ladder leading up to heaven; God renewed with Jacob the promise made to Abraham and Isaac (28:10-22).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob reached Haran, found his uncle Laban, and was employed by him (ch 29). His wages for seven years of labor were to be Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel, as his wife. But Laban substituted Leah, so that Jacob had to work another seven years for Rachel. The Lord prospered Jacob, but he continually had difficulties with Laban. The Lord directed Jacob back to Canaan (31:3), so he left secretly with his wives, children, and property. Laban pursued them because his household gods were missing (possession of these “gods” made the holder heir to the owner’s estate, according to Nuzi custom). Rachel had taken them but successfully concealed them from her father, and Laban went back to Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Fearing a meeting with Esau as they passed through Edom, Jacob sent gifts to his brother and divided his own party into two camps for security. On this return journey, Jacob had an unexpected wrestling bout with the Angel of the Lord, and he was left with a limp and a new name, Israel (ch 32).<\/p>\n<p>The meeting with Esau was friendly, and Jacob went on to Shechem (ch 33), where his sons killed the male Shechemites because of the rape of their sister Dinah (ch 34). God told Jacob to go to Bethel and build an altar to the Lord. All idols of foreign gods were buried (35:1-4). At Bethel, God reaffirmed his promise of a posterity and the land (vv 9-15). Rachel died on the way to Bethlehem, while giving birth to Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th and last son. Isaac died at Hebron at age 180 and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by Esau and Jacob.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 36 records “the generations of Esau” (v 1). Here Esau is also named Edom (“Red”; cf. 25:30).<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Joseph (37:2–50:26)<\/h5>\n<p>Joseph was Jacob’s favorite son and thus incurred the jealousy of his brothers. This was heightened by Joseph’s dreams of lordship over them. Their resentment of Joseph came to a climax when Jacob gave Joseph a beautiful coat. The brothers determined to kill Joseph, but they compromised by selling him to a caravan of merchants, who took him to Egypt and sold him as a slave to Potiphar, an Egyptian captain of the guard (37:36; 39:1).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 38 relates a historic case of levirate marriage. Judah failed to give his widowed daughter-in-law to his third son. She deceived him into fathering twin sons and forced him to acknowledge his faults. The elder son, Perez, is named in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord blessed Joseph, who soon was put in charge of Potiphar’s household (Gn 39). The young man attracted the attention of Potiphar’s wife, who, after many attempts to seduce him, at last accused him of attempted rape. Sentenced on this charge, Joseph met with favor in prison, where he had opportunity to interpret dreams for two of the pharaoh’s servants (ch 40). When the king had dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret, Joseph was summoned from jail. Joseph told Pharaoh that the dreams meant seven years of plenty, followed by seven years of famine. Joseph was then exalted to the office of vizier, or prime minister, second only to the king, and put in charge of the administration of the land (41:37-44).<\/p>\n<p>When the famine came to Palestine, Jacob sent his sons to Egypt to purchase grain. Joseph recognized his brothers but did not reveal his identity to them. Joseph put them to the test by accusing them of being spies (42:9), by keeping one of the brothers (Simeon) hostage (v 19), and by demanding that if they came to Egypt again, they must bring their youngest brother with them (42:20; 43:3). The famine became so severe in Canaan (43:1) that Jacob at last allowed Benjamin to go with his brothers to Egypt. The brothers were again set up by Joseph, who had his silver cup put into Benjamin’s grain sack and then had him apprehended as a thief (ch 44).<\/p>\n<p>At this point Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers (45:4-15) and there was much rejoicing. Joseph pointed out that it was God who had sent him to Egypt (vv 7-8), in order to preserve the lives of all the family. Jacob was then sent for (46:1), and Joseph met him in the land of Goshen (46:28-29). The Israelites were assigned land in the region of Goshen, where they prospered (47:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jacob’s final illness, Joseph brought his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to his father for his blessing. Jacob gave the primary blessing to the second-born, Ephraim (48:13-20). Jacob blessed each of his own sons and then died at the age of at least 130 years. Joseph arranged for Jacob’s body to be prepared for burial according to Egyptian custom (50:2-3). After the burial of their father in the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, Joseph’s brothers worried about vengeance, but Joseph declared, “As far as I am concerned, God turned into good what you meant for evil. He brought me to the high position I have today so I could save the lives of many people” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph died at age 110 with the prophetic request that when the Israelites went up from Egypt they would take his bones with them (50:25; cf. Ex 13:19; Jos 24:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Adam (Person); Covenant; Creation; Eve; Fall of Man; Flood, The; Isaac; Jacob #1; Joseph #1; Nations; Noah #1; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GENESIS, Book of First book of the Bible. Preview • Name • Author • Date • Purpose • Structure • Content Name The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, bere’shith, “in the beginning.” Author The authorship of Gene...","summary_en":"GENESIS, Book of First book of the Bible. Preview • Name • Author • Date • Purpose • Structure • Content Name The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, bere’shith, “in the beginning.” Author The authorship of Gene...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17205,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Image of God","title_en":"Image of God","content_ro":"<h3>IMAGE OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Likeness to God, the most basic affirmation to be made concerning the nature of human beings from a Christian perspective. Humans are unique among the creatures in that they are like God and therefore able to have communion and fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 1:26-27 teaches that God determined to create man and woman in his own “image” and “likeness” and that they would have dominion over the animal creation. The two terms used in the creation account and found also in the NT convey closely related shades of meaning, but the difference between them is no longer thought to be theologically significant.<\/p>\n<p>Because Genesis 2:7 states unambiguously that <em>man<\/em> became a living being, the Bible does not present the view that a previously living creature developed into a human, nor does it suggest that the image of God evolved from a lower form of life. The moment the man and woman became living creatures, they were the image of God. Both male and female share this likeness to God (Gn 1:27).<\/p>\n<p>Other passages that speak of people being created in the image of God are Genesis 5:1, 9:6, 1 Corinthians 11:7, and James 3:9. Ephesians 4:24 and Colossians 3:10 refer to humanity’s redemptive re-creation, but the passages are generally regarded as directly relevant for an understanding of mankind’s original likeness to God. Although explicit references to humans as expressing the image of God are comparatively infrequent in the Bible, the truth itself underlies the whole relation between God and humans and is therefore the presupposition of the entire biblical account.<\/p>\n<p>The affirmation in Genesis 1 that man and woman were made in the image of God is not made of any of the other living creatures. The animals, the fish, and the birds do not share this privilege. It is disputed whether the angels are in the image of God, but certain theologians so view them because they find the image to reside in moral righteousness. However, there is no explicit biblical statement to this effect.<\/p>\n<p>By virtue of his creation from the dust of the ground, mankind has an obvious kinship with the earth. It is not strange, therefore, that the body, both in its constitution and its functions, shows similarities with other earthly creatures. But humans are unique in every aspect of their existence; not some part of a human or some faculty of a human, but a human in his or her wholeness is the image of God. The biblical concept is not that the image is <em>in<\/em> man and woman, but that man and woman <em>are<\/em> the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>However, as man’s kinship with the earth is most clearly visible in his body, so the image of God is best seen when humans are viewed from the perspective of their spirituality. Theologians have sought at this point to enumerate those aspects of spirituality that define humans and set them apart from the animal creation. The image of God is then found to reside in some attribute or combination of attributes, such as rationality, will, freedom, responsibility, or the like. Contemporary theologians prefer not to enumerate attributes, and the Bible does not set forth the image of God in this way. Nevertheless, it is the personality of humans that separates them from the animals and is a reflection of the personality of God. The animals have their existence <em>from<\/em> God, but humans have their being <em>in<\/em> God, and they are his offspring (Acts 17:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>Another major aspect of the image of God doctrine is developed from Ephesians 4:24 and Colossians 3:10. These verses describe the re-creation of the believers in the likeness of God—in righteousness, holiness of the truth, and true knowledge. In other words, Paul declares that the redeemed are re-created into the image of God as they are transformed into the image of Christ, who bears the untainted image of God. Just as the fall into sin was not without its effect on the image of God, so also redemption from sin affects humans as the image of God. Ephesians and Colossians speak of renewal in the image of God the Creator, but other texts become even more specific in view of the mediatorial office of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus Christ is preeminently the image of God (2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:15; Heb 1:3). Frequently this is understood exclusively as a reference to the deity of Christ. To see Christ is to see the Father (Jn 14:9). However, in the passages cited, it is the incarnate Mediator, the last Adam, who is at least all that God intended the first Adam to be. Incarnation means that Jesus is truly human, and because he is truly human, he is truly the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>As the last Adam and the Mediator of the new covenant, Jesus brings his people into conformity with his own image, the image of the Son of God (Rom 8:29). He who became like his brethren, in the likeness of sinful flesh, destroys sin in order that his brethren might reflect his own glory. They are changed into the same image from glory to glory by the Spirit of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18). The believer is to “put on Christ” (Rom 13:14; Gal 3:27; cf. Eph 4:24; Col 3:10, “the new nature” in the image of God), an action also described as the formation of Christ in the believer (Gal 4:19).<\/p>\n<p>Conformity to the image of Jesus Christ is achieved through the process of sanctification that is ultimately completed at the resurrection. Only then is the body changed until it is fashioned like unto the glorious body of Christ (Phil 3:21). Restoration in the image of Christ carries beyond creation in the image of God, for the image of the earthly is then exchanged for the image of the heavenly (1 Cor 15:49).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Woman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IMAGE OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Likeness to God, the most basic affirmation to be made concerning the nature of human beings from a Christian perspective. Humans are unique among the creatures in that they are like God and therefore able to have communion and fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 1:26-27 teaches that God determined to create man and woman in his own “image” and “likeness” and that they would have dominion over the animal creation. The two terms used in the creation account and found also in the NT convey closely related shades of meaning, but the difference between them is no longer thought to be theologically significant.<\/p>\n<p>Because Genesis 2:7 states unambiguously that <em>man<\/em> became a living being, the Bible does not present the view that a previously living creature developed into a human, nor does it suggest that the image of God evolved from a lower form of life. The moment the man and woman became living creatures, they were the image of God. Both male and female share this likeness to God (Gn 1:27).<\/p>\n<p>Other passages that speak of people being created in the image of God are Genesis 5:1, 9:6, 1 Corinthians 11:7, and James 3:9. Ephesians 4:24 and Colossians 3:10 refer to humanity’s redemptive re-creation, but the passages are generally regarded as directly relevant for an understanding of mankind’s original likeness to God. Although explicit references to humans as expressing the image of God are comparatively infrequent in the Bible, the truth itself underlies the whole relation between God and humans and is therefore the presupposition of the entire biblical account.<\/p>\n<p>The affirmation in Genesis 1 that man and woman were made in the image of God is not made of any of the other living creatures. The animals, the fish, and the birds do not share this privilege. It is disputed whether the angels are in the image of God, but certain theologians so view them because they find the image to reside in moral righteousness. However, there is no explicit biblical statement to this effect.<\/p>\n<p>By virtue of his creation from the dust of the ground, mankind has an obvious kinship with the earth. It is not strange, therefore, that the body, both in its constitution and its functions, shows similarities with other earthly creatures. But humans are unique in every aspect of their existence; not some part of a human or some faculty of a human, but a human in his or her wholeness is the image of God. The biblical concept is not that the image is <em>in<\/em> man and woman, but that man and woman <em>are<\/em> the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>However, as man’s kinship with the earth is most clearly visible in his body, so the image of God is best seen when humans are viewed from the perspective of their spirituality. Theologians have sought at this point to enumerate those aspects of spirituality that define humans and set them apart from the animal creation. The image of God is then found to reside in some attribute or combination of attributes, such as rationality, will, freedom, responsibility, or the like. Contemporary theologians prefer not to enumerate attributes, and the Bible does not set forth the image of God in this way. Nevertheless, it is the personality of humans that separates them from the animals and is a reflection of the personality of God. The animals have their existence <em>from<\/em> God, but humans have their being <em>in<\/em> God, and they are his offspring (Acts 17:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>Another major aspect of the image of God doctrine is developed from Ephesians 4:24 and Colossians 3:10. These verses describe the re-creation of the believers in the likeness of God—in righteousness, holiness of the truth, and true knowledge. In other words, Paul declares that the redeemed are re-created into the image of God as they are transformed into the image of Christ, who bears the untainted image of God. Just as the fall into sin was not without its effect on the image of God, so also redemption from sin affects humans as the image of God. Ephesians and Colossians speak of renewal in the image of God the Creator, but other texts become even more specific in view of the mediatorial office of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus Christ is preeminently the image of God (2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:15; Heb 1:3). Frequently this is understood exclusively as a reference to the deity of Christ. To see Christ is to see the Father (Jn 14:9). However, in the passages cited, it is the incarnate Mediator, the last Adam, who is at least all that God intended the first Adam to be. Incarnation means that Jesus is truly human, and because he is truly human, he is truly the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>As the last Adam and the Mediator of the new covenant, Jesus brings his people into conformity with his own image, the image of the Son of God (Rom 8:29). He who became like his brethren, in the likeness of sinful flesh, destroys sin in order that his brethren might reflect his own glory. They are changed into the same image from glory to glory by the Spirit of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18). The believer is to “put on Christ” (Rom 13:14; Gal 3:27; cf. Eph 4:24; Col 3:10, “the new nature” in the image of God), an action also described as the formation of Christ in the believer (Gal 4:19).<\/p>\n<p>Conformity to the image of Jesus Christ is achieved through the process of sanctification that is ultimately completed at the resurrection. Only then is the body changed until it is fashioned like unto the glorious body of Christ (Phil 3:21). Restoration in the image of Christ carries beyond creation in the image of God, for the image of the earthly is then exchanged for the image of the heavenly (1 Cor 15:49).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Woman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IMAGE OF GOD Likeness to God, the most basic affirmation to be made concerning the nature of human beings from a Christian perspective. Humans are unique among the creatures in that they are like God and therefore able to have communion and fellowship with God. Genesis 1:26-27 teaches that God determined to create man and woman in his own “image” and “likeness” and that they would have dominion over the animal creation. The two terms used in the creation account and found also in the NT conve...","summary_en":"IMAGE OF GOD Likeness to God, the most basic affirmation to be made concerning the nature of human beings from a Christian perspective. Humans are unique among the creatures in that they are like God and therefore able to have communion and fellowship with God. Genesis 1:26-27 teaches that God determined to create man and woman in his own “image” and “likeness” and that they would have dominion over the animal creation. The two terms used in the creation account and found also in the NT conve...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24146,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Man","title_en":"Man","content_ro":"<h3>MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Human being, whether male or female.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical teaching on man begins with a right notion concerning God. The biblical perspective of anthropology (i.e., the study of man) is centrally displayed in the context of an elevated theology (i.e., the study of God). A high and reverent view of God leads to a noble and dignified view of man, whereas a poorly developed concept of God often produces a distorted perspective on man. Hence, man may be viewed more importantly than he ought, or man may be seen less important than is biblical. Either view is subbiblical. The place to begin a study of man (which in this article is used as a generic term for both male and female human beings) is with a view of God, his Creator.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MansOrigin\">Man’s Origin<\/p>\n<p>Against the naturalistic, materialistic theories of origins, the biblical view starts with the assertion that the eternal God has created man, the most significant of all his created works. It is not necessary for one to subscribe to a particular chronological scenario for God’s work in the creation of man. Some Christians believe the Bible teaches a closed chronology in Genesis 1 made of six literal 24-hour days (cf. Gn 1:5, 8, 13, etc.), with the stunning, sudden appearance of man coming perhaps just some 6,000 years ago (cf. the chronologies associated with but not limited to Archbishop James Ussher, <em>Annales,<\/em> 1650–58). Some who hold this general viewpoint (sometimes called creation science) extend the creation of man to about 10,000 years ago, based on a view of some elasticity in the chronologies of Genesis 5 and 11.<\/p>\n<p>Others believe the texts of Genesis 1 and 2 may be interpreted far more broadly to speak of a most remote antiquity for the creation of man (extending to millions of years). They argue that process (under God’s control and direction) may have played a significant role in God’s creative work. This viewpoint is best termed progressive creationism, and is to be contrasted with theistic evolution, in which God is usually viewed as initiating the process but having little involvement once the processes are in motion. In the former approach, the Hebrew term “day” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yom<\/span><em>)<\/em> in Genesis 1 may refer to an extended period of time (e.g., the “day-age” theory); thus, the phrasing “an evening and a morning, the <em>x<\/em>th day” may be a literary device to present successive scenes in the creative works of God through the processes of time.<\/p>\n<p>Many Christians find themselves somewhere between a conservative and a broad chronology for man’s origin. Yet in spite of individual preferences, one must give assent to God’s creative work in producing man in order to think biblically about man. The essence of faith begins in the words “I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.”<\/p>\n<p>Man is not only God’s creation but also the pinnacle of his creative effort. Long before modern precision in such things, the ancients were aware of man’s anatomical similarities with members of the animal kingdom. Yet despite these similarities, the biblical viewpoint never places man on the same level as animals—man is distinct, the high point of God’s creative work, the apex of his handicraft. The progression of the created things in Genesis 1 is climactic; all of God’s created work culminated in his fashioning of man.<\/p>\n<p>The distinct behavioral characteristics of man include language, toolmaking, and culture. Distinct experiential characteristics include reflective awareness, ethical concern, aesthetic urges, historical awareness, and metaphysical concern. These factors individually and collectively separate man from other forms of animal life. Man is far more than the “naked ape” of some modern evolutionary theories. But sociology alone does not suffice to explain the full nature of man. That is the subject of divine revelation.<\/p>\n<p>While man bears a continuity with God’s creation (assumed in the words of Gn 2:7, being fashioned from the dust of the earth), man is also distinct from all that precedes him because God breathed into him the breath of life so that he became a living soul (2:7). Man was created by God as male and female (1:27), meaning that what is said generally of man must be said of both the male and the female, and that the truest picture of what it means to be human will be found in the context of man and woman together. The commands to multiply and exercise sovereignty over the earth were given to both sexes as shared responsibility. Similarly, it is man as male and female that rebelled against God and bears the consequences of that primeval sin in the postfall world, and it is man as male and female that Christ came to redeem (cf. Gal 3:28). At the same time, the words “male” and “female” denote true distinctions. Many perceived gender differences may be culturally conditioned, yet the prime sexual distinctions between male (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zakar<\/span><em>,<\/em> “the piercer”) and female (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neqeba<\/span><em>,<\/em> “the pierced”) are divinely intended. It takes both male and female to exhibit the full image of God (see Gn 1:27).<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, the most stunning biblical assertion respecting man is that God made man <em>in his image.<\/em> Of no other creature, not even the angels, is such a statement found. The words “in God’s image” in Genesis 1:26-28 are the basis for the psalmist’s paraphrase in Psalm 8:5, “for you have made him to lack but little of God” (literal translation; “lower than the angels,” Septuagint translation). The meaning of the phrase “the image of God” (Latin, <em>imago Dei<\/em>) has been the subject of much debate. Some have thought the phrase to refer to a physical representation of God, but this is doubtful in that God is spirit (cf. Jn 4:24). Others think the phrase refers to man’s personhood, which corresponds to the personality of God (having intellect, sensibilities, and will). Such qualities of man may be found in God’s image; however, these varied aspects of personality are also shared by other members of the animal kingdom and are not unique to the human species.<\/p>\n<p>The basic meaning of the word “image” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tselem<\/span>) is “shadow,” “representation,” or “likeness.” The image of God in man reveals God’s perspective of man’s worth and dignity as a representation or a shadow of himself in the created world. Ancient kings of Assyria were known to have physical images of themselves placed in outlying districts as a reminder to those who might be prone to forget that these areas were a part of the empire. So God has placed in man a shadow of himself, a representation of his presence, in the world that he has made.<\/p>\n<p>This view of God’s image in man seems to be confirmed by the immediate context in Genesis 1. Man, created in God’s image, is to have dominion over all of God’s other works (Gn 1:26; see also Ps 8:5). Further, as a representative of the Creator, man is to respond to him. Jesus’ assertion of the spirituality of God results in a response of worship in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:21-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MansNature\">Man’s Nature<\/p>\n<p>One may tend to think of man in parts, but the biblical emphasis is on man as a whole. Debates continue on the tripartite (threefold) nature of man (cf. 1 Thes 5:23)—spirit, soul, and body—as against a bipartite (twofold) nature of man, material and immaterial. Though the Bible does seem to support both positions, the most important issue respecting the nature of man is his unity rather than the number of his parts. Hence, a biblical view of man begins in the assertion that one is a person made up of physical and nonphysical properties. In the words of Karl Barth, the human person is “bodily soul, as he is also besouled body.” There is no person in body only, nor can one easily think of a bodiless spirit as a person, except in a temporary, transitional state. The Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nephesh<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “soul,” is best rendered “person” in most contexts. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span> (“breath,” “wind,” “spirit”) and the Greek words <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span> (“spirit”) and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> (“soul”) often speak of the immaterial part of man. This is no less real than the physical. A purely material, physical view of man is frightfully deficient. At the same time, an overemphasis on the spirit and a deemphasis on the physical is neither realistic nor balanced. One may say, “I am a person whose existence is presently very dependent upon my physical body. But I am more than body, more than flesh. When my body dies, I still live. When my flesh decays, I exist. But one day I shall live in a body again. For the notion of a disembodied spirit is not the full measure of my humanity. God’s ideal for me is to live my life in my [new] body. So in hope of the eternal state, I believe in the resurrection of the body and life everlasting.”<\/p>\n<p>One cannot go far in thinking of the nature of man from the biblical vantage point without first facing the problem of the fall. Genesis 3 suggests that unfallen man was immortal, that his powers of sexual reproduction were not originally bound in the pain in childbearing, and that his work was not troubled by reversals in nature. After the fall, however, all was changed: within man himself, between the male and the female, in his interaction with nature, and in his relationship with the Creator.<\/p>\n<p>As a result of the fall, man has become profoundly fallen, a fallenness extending to every part of his person. The phrase “total depravity” need not mean that one is as evil as he or she might be, but rather that the results of sin affect one’s whole being. At the time, the image of God in man continues in some way after the fall, providing the divine rationale for salvation (cf. Rom 5). It is essentially because of God’s estimation of the intrinsic worth of man that the divine justification of salvation may be maintained.<\/p>\n<p>The old debate between the essential goodness and the evil disposition of man finds its quandary and resolution in the Genesis account: God made man to consciously reflect the dignity and nobility of the Creator, yet man, by his own deliberate rebellion, turned against his Creator and continues, except by God’s grace, in the ensuing sin that marks his life. This resultant sin is both a quality of being in the fallen person, as well as numerous, continuing acts of pride and selfishness. Though the image of God in man was marred by the fall, it may be stimulated anew by the effective work of the Spirit of God as one comes to newness of life in Christ. This gracious work of God brings personal renewal, restoration of relationships with others, and fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Man, then, who was created good by God, has become evil by his own devices, yet in God’s power he may recapture the good again. The rediscovery of what it means to be fully human is found in the life of Jesus, whose human life is the new beginning for man. Hence, Jesus is the new Adam; in his model there is a new beginning that replaces the former pattern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MansDestiny\">Man’s Destiny<\/p>\n<p>A biblical view of man must include a balanced statement respecting his divine origin, his rebellion against the grace of God, his judgment, and his prospect for redemption in the person of the Savior Jesus with the promise of eternal life. Man has a beginning and will live forever. This assertion is in stark contrast to naturalistic theories of origins and destinies. One of the most deceptive tendencies of modern thought is the concept “coming to terms with death.” People with no thought of God and no hope for eternity are encouraging each other to accept the inevitable decline and demise of their bodies as the natural end to human life. The biblical notion is that death in man is not natural at all.<\/p>\n<p>Death is an acquired trait, not the natural destiny of man. Death may be said of the body but not of the spirit. The biblical teaching is that while the body dies and decays, the person lives on in hope of a renewed body. Those who have come to know Christ go to be with him when their bodies die (Phil 1:23) and anticipate the resurrection of the body for eternal life to come (1 Cor 15:35-49). Those who die apart from Christ do not cease to exist but rather are assigned an eternal existence of conscious knowledge that they are separated from God and have fallen short of their destiny to enjoy his presence forever. The biblical teaching on the destiny of the lost is quite unpalatable for modern man. Even Christians who have generally high views of biblical inspiration may find themselves blanching at the thought of eternal punishment of the wicked. Yet the biblical doctrine of the final judgment of the wicked is as well established as most teachings in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most dramatic truths in Scripture respecting the nature of man is to realize that it was for man that God initiated the salvation work that led to the incarnation of the eternal son of God. After his resurrection and ascension, the Lord Jesus Christ returned to his eternal position of glory and majesty in heaven, where he forever remains the God-man. As God, he shares all the attributes of the Father and the Holy Spirit, and as man, identifies with man. He reveals himself in a physical body, albeit the resurrection body, the firstfruits of the resurrection of all who are his. The incarnation, then, brought about an eternal change in deity. Only a very high view of the worth of man could have brought God to such a fundamental change in himself. As the writer to the Hebrews states, “Because God’s children are human beings—made of flesh and blood—Jesus also became flesh and blood by being born in human form” (Heb 2:14, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The final measure of our humanity is that man was made to worship God and to enjoy him forever. Such thoughts are not attributed to any other created being. Even the angels, who have maintained their perfect state and who worship the Father in conscious bliss, do not have quite the same relationship with God as do redeemed men (Heb 2:16).<\/p>\n<p>What is man? In Christ, man is all God means him to be, in majesty and dignity, and in joy before his throne forever.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Image of God; Man, Natural; Man, Old and New.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Human being, whether male or female.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical teaching on man begins with a right notion concerning God. The biblical perspective of anthropology (i.e., the study of man) is centrally displayed in the context of an elevated theology (i.e., the study of God). A high and reverent view of God leads to a noble and dignified view of man, whereas a poorly developed concept of God often produces a distorted perspective on man. Hence, man may be viewed more importantly than he ought, or man may be seen less important than is biblical. Either view is subbiblical. The place to begin a study of man (which in this article is used as a generic term for both male and female human beings) is with a view of God, his Creator.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MansOrigin\">Man’s Origin<\/p>\n<p>Against the naturalistic, materialistic theories of origins, the biblical view starts with the assertion that the eternal God has created man, the most significant of all his created works. It is not necessary for one to subscribe to a particular chronological scenario for God’s work in the creation of man. Some Christians believe the Bible teaches a closed chronology in Genesis 1 made of six literal 24-hour days (cf. Gn 1:5, 8, 13, etc.), with the stunning, sudden appearance of man coming perhaps just some 6,000 years ago (cf. the chronologies associated with but not limited to Archbishop James Ussher, <em>Annales,<\/em> 1650–58). Some who hold this general viewpoint (sometimes called creation science) extend the creation of man to about 10,000 years ago, based on a view of some elasticity in the chronologies of Genesis 5 and 11.<\/p>\n<p>Others believe the texts of Genesis 1 and 2 may be interpreted far more broadly to speak of a most remote antiquity for the creation of man (extending to millions of years). They argue that process (under God’s control and direction) may have played a significant role in God’s creative work. This viewpoint is best termed progressive creationism, and is to be contrasted with theistic evolution, in which God is usually viewed as initiating the process but having little involvement once the processes are in motion. In the former approach, the Hebrew term “day” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yom<\/span><em>)<\/em> in Genesis 1 may refer to an extended period of time (e.g., the “day-age” theory); thus, the phrasing “an evening and a morning, the <em>x<\/em>th day” may be a literary device to present successive scenes in the creative works of God through the processes of time.<\/p>\n<p>Many Christians find themselves somewhere between a conservative and a broad chronology for man’s origin. Yet in spite of individual preferences, one must give assent to God’s creative work in producing man in order to think biblically about man. The essence of faith begins in the words “I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.”<\/p>\n<p>Man is not only God’s creation but also the pinnacle of his creative effort. Long before modern precision in such things, the ancients were aware of man’s anatomical similarities with members of the animal kingdom. Yet despite these similarities, the biblical viewpoint never places man on the same level as animals—man is distinct, the high point of God’s creative work, the apex of his handicraft. The progression of the created things in Genesis 1 is climactic; all of God’s created work culminated in his fashioning of man.<\/p>\n<p>The distinct behavioral characteristics of man include language, toolmaking, and culture. Distinct experiential characteristics include reflective awareness, ethical concern, aesthetic urges, historical awareness, and metaphysical concern. These factors individually and collectively separate man from other forms of animal life. Man is far more than the “naked ape” of some modern evolutionary theories. But sociology alone does not suffice to explain the full nature of man. That is the subject of divine revelation.<\/p>\n<p>While man bears a continuity with God’s creation (assumed in the words of Gn 2:7, being fashioned from the dust of the earth), man is also distinct from all that precedes him because God breathed into him the breath of life so that he became a living soul (2:7). Man was created by God as male and female (1:27), meaning that what is said generally of man must be said of both the male and the female, and that the truest picture of what it means to be human will be found in the context of man and woman together. The commands to multiply and exercise sovereignty over the earth were given to both sexes as shared responsibility. Similarly, it is man as male and female that rebelled against God and bears the consequences of that primeval sin in the postfall world, and it is man as male and female that Christ came to redeem (cf. Gal 3:28). At the same time, the words “male” and “female” denote true distinctions. Many perceived gender differences may be culturally conditioned, yet the prime sexual distinctions between male (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zakar<\/span><em>,<\/em> “the piercer”) and female (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neqeba<\/span><em>,<\/em> “the pierced”) are divinely intended. It takes both male and female to exhibit the full image of God (see Gn 1:27).<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, the most stunning biblical assertion respecting man is that God made man <em>in his image.<\/em> Of no other creature, not even the angels, is such a statement found. The words “in God’s image” in Genesis 1:26-28 are the basis for the psalmist’s paraphrase in Psalm 8:5, “for you have made him to lack but little of God” (literal translation; “lower than the angels,” Septuagint translation). The meaning of the phrase “the image of God” (Latin, <em>imago Dei<\/em>) has been the subject of much debate. Some have thought the phrase to refer to a physical representation of God, but this is doubtful in that God is spirit (cf. Jn 4:24). Others think the phrase refers to man’s personhood, which corresponds to the personality of God (having intellect, sensibilities, and will). Such qualities of man may be found in God’s image; however, these varied aspects of personality are also shared by other members of the animal kingdom and are not unique to the human species.<\/p>\n<p>The basic meaning of the word “image” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tselem<\/span>) is “shadow,” “representation,” or “likeness.” The image of God in man reveals God’s perspective of man’s worth and dignity as a representation or a shadow of himself in the created world. Ancient kings of Assyria were known to have physical images of themselves placed in outlying districts as a reminder to those who might be prone to forget that these areas were a part of the empire. So God has placed in man a shadow of himself, a representation of his presence, in the world that he has made.<\/p>\n<p>This view of God’s image in man seems to be confirmed by the immediate context in Genesis 1. Man, created in God’s image, is to have dominion over all of God’s other works (Gn 1:26; see also Ps 8:5). Further, as a representative of the Creator, man is to respond to him. Jesus’ assertion of the spirituality of God results in a response of worship in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:21-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MansNature\">Man’s Nature<\/p>\n<p>One may tend to think of man in parts, but the biblical emphasis is on man as a whole. Debates continue on the tripartite (threefold) nature of man (cf. 1 Thes 5:23)—spirit, soul, and body—as against a bipartite (twofold) nature of man, material and immaterial. Though the Bible does seem to support both positions, the most important issue respecting the nature of man is his unity rather than the number of his parts. Hence, a biblical view of man begins in the assertion that one is a person made up of physical and nonphysical properties. In the words of Karl Barth, the human person is “bodily soul, as he is also besouled body.” There is no person in body only, nor can one easily think of a bodiless spirit as a person, except in a temporary, transitional state. The Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nephesh<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “soul,” is best rendered “person” in most contexts. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span> (“breath,” “wind,” “spirit”) and the Greek words <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span> (“spirit”) and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> (“soul”) often speak of the immaterial part of man. This is no less real than the physical. A purely material, physical view of man is frightfully deficient. At the same time, an overemphasis on the spirit and a deemphasis on the physical is neither realistic nor balanced. One may say, “I am a person whose existence is presently very dependent upon my physical body. But I am more than body, more than flesh. When my body dies, I still live. When my flesh decays, I exist. But one day I shall live in a body again. For the notion of a disembodied spirit is not the full measure of my humanity. God’s ideal for me is to live my life in my [new] body. So in hope of the eternal state, I believe in the resurrection of the body and life everlasting.”<\/p>\n<p>One cannot go far in thinking of the nature of man from the biblical vantage point without first facing the problem of the fall. Genesis 3 suggests that unfallen man was immortal, that his powers of sexual reproduction were not originally bound in the pain in childbearing, and that his work was not troubled by reversals in nature. After the fall, however, all was changed: within man himself, between the male and the female, in his interaction with nature, and in his relationship with the Creator.<\/p>\n<p>As a result of the fall, man has become profoundly fallen, a fallenness extending to every part of his person. The phrase “total depravity” need not mean that one is as evil as he or she might be, but rather that the results of sin affect one’s whole being. At the time, the image of God in man continues in some way after the fall, providing the divine rationale for salvation (cf. Rom 5). It is essentially because of God’s estimation of the intrinsic worth of man that the divine justification of salvation may be maintained.<\/p>\n<p>The old debate between the essential goodness and the evil disposition of man finds its quandary and resolution in the Genesis account: God made man to consciously reflect the dignity and nobility of the Creator, yet man, by his own deliberate rebellion, turned against his Creator and continues, except by God’s grace, in the ensuing sin that marks his life. This resultant sin is both a quality of being in the fallen person, as well as numerous, continuing acts of pride and selfishness. Though the image of God in man was marred by the fall, it may be stimulated anew by the effective work of the Spirit of God as one comes to newness of life in Christ. This gracious work of God brings personal renewal, restoration of relationships with others, and fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Man, then, who was created good by God, has become evil by his own devices, yet in God’s power he may recapture the good again. The rediscovery of what it means to be fully human is found in the life of Jesus, whose human life is the new beginning for man. Hence, Jesus is the new Adam; in his model there is a new beginning that replaces the former pattern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MansDestiny\">Man’s Destiny<\/p>\n<p>A biblical view of man must include a balanced statement respecting his divine origin, his rebellion against the grace of God, his judgment, and his prospect for redemption in the person of the Savior Jesus with the promise of eternal life. Man has a beginning and will live forever. This assertion is in stark contrast to naturalistic theories of origins and destinies. One of the most deceptive tendencies of modern thought is the concept “coming to terms with death.” People with no thought of God and no hope for eternity are encouraging each other to accept the inevitable decline and demise of their bodies as the natural end to human life. The biblical notion is that death in man is not natural at all.<\/p>\n<p>Death is an acquired trait, not the natural destiny of man. Death may be said of the body but not of the spirit. The biblical teaching is that while the body dies and decays, the person lives on in hope of a renewed body. Those who have come to know Christ go to be with him when their bodies die (Phil 1:23) and anticipate the resurrection of the body for eternal life to come (1 Cor 15:35-49). Those who die apart from Christ do not cease to exist but rather are assigned an eternal existence of conscious knowledge that they are separated from God and have fallen short of their destiny to enjoy his presence forever. The biblical teaching on the destiny of the lost is quite unpalatable for modern man. Even Christians who have generally high views of biblical inspiration may find themselves blanching at the thought of eternal punishment of the wicked. Yet the biblical doctrine of the final judgment of the wicked is as well established as most teachings in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most dramatic truths in Scripture respecting the nature of man is to realize that it was for man that God initiated the salvation work that led to the incarnation of the eternal son of God. After his resurrection and ascension, the Lord Jesus Christ returned to his eternal position of glory and majesty in heaven, where he forever remains the God-man. As God, he shares all the attributes of the Father and the Holy Spirit, and as man, identifies with man. He reveals himself in a physical body, albeit the resurrection body, the firstfruits of the resurrection of all who are his. The incarnation, then, brought about an eternal change in deity. Only a very high view of the worth of man could have brought God to such a fundamental change in himself. As the writer to the Hebrews states, “Because God’s children are human beings—made of flesh and blood—Jesus also became flesh and blood by being born in human form” (Heb 2:14, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The final measure of our humanity is that man was made to worship God and to enjoy him forever. Such thoughts are not attributed to any other created being. Even the angels, who have maintained their perfect state and who worship the Father in conscious bliss, do not have quite the same relationship with God as do redeemed men (Heb 2:16).<\/p>\n<p>What is man? In Christ, man is all God means him to be, in majesty and dignity, and in joy before his throne forever.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Image of God; Man, Natural; Man, Old and New.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MAN Human being, whether male or female. The biblical teaching on man begins with a right notion concerning God. The biblical perspective of anthropology (i.e., the study of man) is centrally displayed in the context of an elevated theology (i.e., the study of God). A high and reverent view of God leads to a noble and dignified view of man, whereas a poorly developed concept of God often produces a distorted perspective on man. Hence, man may be viewed more importantly than he ought, or man m...","summary_en":"MAN Human being, whether male or female. The biblical teaching on man begins with a right notion concerning God. The biblical perspective of anthropology (i.e., the study of man) is centrally displayed in the context of an elevated theology (i.e., the study of God). A high and reverent view of God leads to a noble and dignified view of man, whereas a poorly developed concept of God often produces a distorted perspective on man. Hence, man may be viewed more importantly than he ought, or man m...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27665,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Numerology*, Numbers","title_en":"and Numerology*, Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","summary_en":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34865,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shem","title_en":"Shem","content_ro":"<h3>SHEM<\/h3>\n<p>Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great.<\/p>\n<p>After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this act, Noah later pronounced a curse on Canaan, the son of Ham, and a blessing on both Shem and Japheth.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 11:10-27, the line of descent for the promised seed, which was to crush Satan (Gn 3:15; 5:1-32), is traced through Shem to Abraham, and ultimately through Judah and David to Christ (cf. Lk 3:36). The blessing of Noah on Shem is thus to be taken as an indication that the line of Shem will be the line through which the seed of Genesis 3:15 will come. This is the first time in the Bible that God is called the God of some particular individual or group of people. The statement that Canaan would be a servant to Shem was fulfilled centuries later when the Israelites, who descended from Shem, entered the land of Canaan and subdued the inhabitants of the land (cf. 1 Kgs 9:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Noah also said that Japheth would be enlarged and dwell in the tents of Shem (Gn 9:27), the latter of which would seem to imply sustenance and protection. After Japheth would be greatly increased in numbers, the Japhethites would be brought into contact with Shem and would share in the blessings and promises of the Semitic faith. Many scholars see fulfillment of this prophecy in the opening of the gospel to the Gentiles during the NT era of the establishment of the church.<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” recorded in Genesis 10, five descendants of Shem are mentioned (Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram). Receiving particular emphasis among these descendants is Eber from the line of Arphaxad, whose line is traced to Abraham in Genesis 11:16-27.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEM<\/h3>\n<p>Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great.<\/p>\n<p>After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this act, Noah later pronounced a curse on Canaan, the son of Ham, and a blessing on both Shem and Japheth.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 11:10-27, the line of descent for the promised seed, which was to crush Satan (Gn 3:15; 5:1-32), is traced through Shem to Abraham, and ultimately through Judah and David to Christ (cf. Lk 3:36). The blessing of Noah on Shem is thus to be taken as an indication that the line of Shem will be the line through which the seed of Genesis 3:15 will come. This is the first time in the Bible that God is called the God of some particular individual or group of people. The statement that Canaan would be a servant to Shem was fulfilled centuries later when the Israelites, who descended from Shem, entered the land of Canaan and subdued the inhabitants of the land (cf. 1 Kgs 9:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Noah also said that Japheth would be enlarged and dwell in the tents of Shem (Gn 9:27), the latter of which would seem to imply sustenance and protection. After Japheth would be greatly increased in numbers, the Japhethites would be brought into contact with Shem and would share in the blessings and promises of the Semitic faith. Many scholars see fulfillment of this prophecy in the opening of the gospel to the Gentiles during the NT era of the establishment of the church.<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” recorded in Genesis 10, five descendants of Shem are mentioned (Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram). Receiving particular emphasis among these descendants is Eber from the line of Arphaxad, whose line is traced to Abraham in Genesis 11:16-27.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEM Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great. After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this ...","summary_en":"SHEM Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great. After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42902,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","summary_en":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42903,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","summary_en":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42904,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","summary_en":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70528,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","summary_en":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70529,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","summary_en":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70530,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","summary_en":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98154,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","summary_en":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98155,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","summary_en":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98156,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","summary_en":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125780,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-32<\/strong> The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The number ten indicates completeness (ten plagues, Exod 7:8–11:10; Ten Commandments, Exod 20:2-17). Noah closed history before the flood, and Abram inaugurated a new era.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","summary_en":"5:1-32 The genealogies of Genesis go beyond simply recording history. By selective information and by structure, they communicate spiritual truth. The genealogies highlight God’s blessing, authenticate the family heritage of important individuals, and hold the Genesis narrative together by showing familial continuity. Adam’s genealogy through Seth traces ten generations to Noah (see 1 Chr 1:1-4; Luke 3:36-38), with the flood intervening before another ten generations from Noah to Abram. The n...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125781,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1-2<\/strong> This is the prologue to the second <em>account<\/em> in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","summary_en":"5:1-2 This is the prologue to the second account in Genesis (5:1–6:8; see study note on 2:4); it connects God’s purpose in creation with Seth’s line rather than Cain’s (4:17-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125782,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:1","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:1<\/strong> <em>written account:<\/em> Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • <em>like himself:<\/em> See 1:26 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","summary_en":"5:1 written account: Although the previous account (2:4–4:26) focused on Adam, Eve, and their first children, it was technically “the account of the . . . heavens and the earth.” Genesis 5:1-32 is a more typical genealogy. • like himself: See 1:26 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":42905,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","summary_en":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70531,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","summary_en":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98157,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","summary_en":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125783,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:2","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:2<\/strong> <em>male and female . . . “human”<\/em> (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adam<\/span>): See 1:27 and study note. • <em>blessed them:<\/em> See 1:28 and study note.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","summary_en":"5:2 male and female . . . “human” (Hebrew ’adam): See 1:27 and study note. • blessed them: See 1:28 and study note.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":40491,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68117,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95743,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123369,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":533,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adam (Person)","title_en":"Adam (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","summary_en":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27622,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>NOAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the <span>Lord<\/span> has cursed” (v 29, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man righteous in God’s sight and blameless before people (Gn 6:3-9). Following God’s precise instructions, Noah constructed an ark into which went only eight people—Noah and his wife and his three sons and their wives—and all kinds of creatures in pairs. They were thus protected from the ensuing deluge in which all other living things perished (6:14–8:19). When they emerged from the ark, Noah built an altar and sacrificed burnt offerings that pleased God, who promised that the Flood would never be repeated or the sequence of the seasons disrupted, despite man’s sin (8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah had withstood mighty temptations, but, whether through carelessness or old age, he became drunk. Family members reacted differently and were judged accordingly. Shem and Japheth received blessing. Ham received no blessing, but his son Canaan was cursed (9:20-27). Noah was 950 years old when he died, 350 years after the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Noah, Daniel, and Job are specifically cited for “their righteousness” in Ezekiel 14:12-14, 19-20. The Letter to the Hebrews commends Noah, who by faith, holy fear, and rejection of the world became the heir of righteousness (11:7), and 2 Peter 2:5 calls him “a preacher of righteousness.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flood, The; Gilgamesh Epic.<\/p>\n<li>2. Daughter of Zelophehad of Manasseh’s tribe (Nm 26:33). When their father died without a son, she and her four sisters successfully petitioned for a change in the law that would protect their inheritance rights (Nm 27:1-11; cf. Jos 17:3-6). They were, however, restricted to marrying within their own tribe (Nm 36:1-12).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>NOAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the <span>Lord<\/span> has cursed” (v 29, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man righteous in God’s sight and blameless before people (Gn 6:3-9). Following God’s precise instructions, Noah constructed an ark into which went only eight people—Noah and his wife and his three sons and their wives—and all kinds of creatures in pairs. They were thus protected from the ensuing deluge in which all other living things perished (6:14–8:19). When they emerged from the ark, Noah built an altar and sacrificed burnt offerings that pleased God, who promised that the Flood would never be repeated or the sequence of the seasons disrupted, despite man’s sin (8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah had withstood mighty temptations, but, whether through carelessness or old age, he became drunk. Family members reacted differently and were judged accordingly. Shem and Japheth received blessing. Ham received no blessing, but his son Canaan was cursed (9:20-27). Noah was 950 years old when he died, 350 years after the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Noah, Daniel, and Job are specifically cited for “their righteousness” in Ezekiel 14:12-14, 19-20. The Letter to the Hebrews commends Noah, who by faith, holy fear, and rejection of the world became the heir of righteousness (11:7), and 2 Peter 2:5 calls him “a preacher of righteousness.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flood, The; Gilgamesh Epic.<\/p>\n<li>2. Daughter of Zelophehad of Manasseh’s tribe (Nm 26:33). When their father died without a son, she and her four sisters successfully petitioned for a change in the law that would protect their inheritance rights (Nm 27:1-11; cf. Jos 17:3-6). They were, however, restricted to marrying within their own tribe (Nm 36:1-12).<\/li>","summary_ro":"NOAH 1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the Lord has cursed” (v 29, nlt). Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man right...","summary_en":"NOAH 1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the Lord has cursed” (v 29, nlt). Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man right...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34490,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Seth","title_en":"Seth","content_ro":"<h3>SETH<\/h3>\n<p>Third son of Adam and Eve, replacing Abel, whom Cain murdered (Gn 4:25). He appears as the firstborn son of Adam in the genealogies of Genesis 5:3-8, 1 Chronicles 1:1 (<span>kjv<\/span> “Sheth”), and Luke 3:38. It was through Seth’s line that Jesus was born. Seth was the father of Enosh and lived 912 years.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SETH<\/h3>\n<p>Third son of Adam and Eve, replacing Abel, whom Cain murdered (Gn 4:25). He appears as the firstborn son of Adam in the genealogies of Genesis 5:3-8, 1 Chronicles 1:1 (<span>kjv<\/span> “Sheth”), and Luke 3:38. It was through Seth’s line that Jesus was born. Seth was the father of Enosh and lived 912 years.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SETH Third son of Adam and Eve, replacing Abel, whom Cain murdered (Gn 4:25). He appears as the firstborn son of Adam in the genealogies of Genesis 5:3-8, 1 Chronicles 1:1 (kjv “Sheth”), and Luke 3:38. It was through Seth’s line that Jesus was born. Seth was the father of Enosh and lived 912 years. See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","summary_en":"SETH Third son of Adam and Eve, replacing Abel, whom Cain murdered (Gn 4:25). He appears as the firstborn son of Adam in the genealogies of Genesis 5:3-8, 1 Chronicles 1:1 (kjv “Sheth”), and Luke 3:38. It was through Seth’s line that Jesus was born. Seth was the father of Enosh and lived 912 years. See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42906,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","summary_en":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70532,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","summary_en":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98158,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","summary_en":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125784,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:3","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:3<\/strong> <em>just like him—in his very image:<\/em> The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","summary_en":"5:3 just like him—in his very image: The image and likeness of God (see note on 1:26) is preserved in human beings despite sin. Adam’s sinful nature was also carried forward (Rom 5:12-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":8809,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Day","title_en":"Day","content_ro":"<h3>DAY<\/h3>\n<p>Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckoning presumably based on the Torah (cf. Gn 1:14, 19). That kind of literal solar (24-hour) day is known as a civil day. Among other ancient Near Eastern nations the civil day began at different times. Greek custom agreed with that of the Hebrews; the Babylonians started their day at sunrise; the Egyptian and Roman day stretched from one midnight to the next.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalDaysandWeeks\">Biblical Days and Weeks<\/p>\n<p>Commonly recognized units of the visible (12-hour) day were morning, noonday, and evening (Ps 55:17). Those divisions were sometimes defined by terms for dawn (Jb 3:9), the heat of the day (1 Sm 11:11), noon (Gn 43:16), the cool of the day (3:8), and evening (Ru 2:17). The Hebrew phrase “between the two evenings” (Ex 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) probably referred to dusk, the dark part of twilight (Ex 16:12). Division of days into consecutive hours did not take place until the time of Christ. The closest OT approximation to such a unit was the division of the day into quarters (Neh 9:3), perhaps a counterpart of the preexilic division of the night into watches.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Hebrews did not name the days of the week other than the Sabbath. Rather, they referred to them numerically, a practice carried over into NT times (Lk 24:1). Because of the traditional Hebrew emphasis on the Sabbath, it was important for the Jews to know the exact time when the Sabbath began. The Pharisees therefore decided that the appearance of three stars following sunset would determine the Sabbath day’s beginning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DaysofCreation\">Days of Creation<\/p>\n<p>Many people believe that the days mentioned in the Genesis Creation narrative were 24-hour periods. The phrase “there was evening, there was morning” is used to support that idea. That expression, however, is actually a Sumerian literary figure that pairs opposites together to describe totality. Thus “evening-morning” means a complete phase of time within the total creative cycle; it emphasizes the completeness or comprehensiveness of the process, not the specific period of time in which that process was accomplished. The totality of Creation, phase by phase, may have been thus depicted without any necessary reference to a defined time period.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Sumerian civil day included only the visible (12-hour) period, a legal day of other nations was actually a “double day” (24 hours). If the early Genesis material reflects Sumerian culture, the use of “evening-morning” would preclude current concepts of a civil day and point instead to a phase or general time period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestament\">Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “day” frequently has a figurative meaning—for example, the “day of the Lord” (Jl 1:15; Am 5:18), the “day of trouble” (Ps 20:1), and the “day of God’s wrath” (Jb 20:28). The plural form is sometimes used to describe a king’s reign (1 Kgs 10:21) or the extent of an individual’s life (Gn 5:4; 1 Kgs 3:14; Ps 90:12). God is described in the book of Daniel as the “Ancient of Days” (Dn 7:9, 13).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the Sabbath (Gn 2:3; Ex 20:8-11), which was reserved for rest and worship, “day” was applied to the Passover celebration each spring (Ex 12:14; Lv 23:5) and the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:29-31) each autumn. As with the Sabbath, no work was performed on those occasions; prescribed religious rituals were observed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestament\">New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the use of “day” followed Semitic usage to some extent, although the four military night watches were of Greek and Roman origin. The 12-hour day of NT times was a legacy of Babylonian astronomy (cf. Jn 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the literal usage of “day,” NT authors sometimes employed it figuratively, as in such expressions as the “day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2) and the “day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). Or they described specified periods of time, as in the “days of his Temple duties” (Lk 1:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Special feasts mentioned include the Passover (Jn 12:1), the days of Unleavened Bread (Acts 12:3), and the Day of Pentecost (2:1).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the period of human life is described as days (Jn 9:4). Christians are called “children of the light and of the day” (1 Thes 5:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Longer periods or eras are referred to as days (2 Cor 6:2; Eph 5:16; 6:13; Heb 5:7). The ominous note struck by the Hebrew prophets about a day of judgment is matched by NT stress on a day of final divine judgment when the Son of Man (Jesus) will reveal himself as Lord (Lk 17:30; Jn 6:39-44; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Pt 2:9; 3:7, 12; 1 Jn 4:17; Rv 16:14). The “day of eternity” marks that point at which time will become eternity (2 Pt 3:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new Jerusalem, dwelling place of God’s people, is described as a place of perpetual day (Rv 21:25).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Day of the Lord; Eschatology.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DAY<\/h3>\n<p>Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckoning presumably based on the Torah (cf. Gn 1:14, 19). That kind of literal solar (24-hour) day is known as a civil day. Among other ancient Near Eastern nations the civil day began at different times. Greek custom agreed with that of the Hebrews; the Babylonians started their day at sunrise; the Egyptian and Roman day stretched from one midnight to the next.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalDaysandWeeks\">Biblical Days and Weeks<\/p>\n<p>Commonly recognized units of the visible (12-hour) day were morning, noonday, and evening (Ps 55:17). Those divisions were sometimes defined by terms for dawn (Jb 3:9), the heat of the day (1 Sm 11:11), noon (Gn 43:16), the cool of the day (3:8), and evening (Ru 2:17). The Hebrew phrase “between the two evenings” (Ex 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) probably referred to dusk, the dark part of twilight (Ex 16:12). Division of days into consecutive hours did not take place until the time of Christ. The closest OT approximation to such a unit was the division of the day into quarters (Neh 9:3), perhaps a counterpart of the preexilic division of the night into watches.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Hebrews did not name the days of the week other than the Sabbath. Rather, they referred to them numerically, a practice carried over into NT times (Lk 24:1). Because of the traditional Hebrew emphasis on the Sabbath, it was important for the Jews to know the exact time when the Sabbath began. The Pharisees therefore decided that the appearance of three stars following sunset would determine the Sabbath day’s beginning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DaysofCreation\">Days of Creation<\/p>\n<p>Many people believe that the days mentioned in the Genesis Creation narrative were 24-hour periods. The phrase “there was evening, there was morning” is used to support that idea. That expression, however, is actually a Sumerian literary figure that pairs opposites together to describe totality. Thus “evening-morning” means a complete phase of time within the total creative cycle; it emphasizes the completeness or comprehensiveness of the process, not the specific period of time in which that process was accomplished. The totality of Creation, phase by phase, may have been thus depicted without any necessary reference to a defined time period.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Sumerian civil day included only the visible (12-hour) period, a legal day of other nations was actually a “double day” (24 hours). If the early Genesis material reflects Sumerian culture, the use of “evening-morning” would preclude current concepts of a civil day and point instead to a phase or general time period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestament\">Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “day” frequently has a figurative meaning—for example, the “day of the Lord” (Jl 1:15; Am 5:18), the “day of trouble” (Ps 20:1), and the “day of God’s wrath” (Jb 20:28). The plural form is sometimes used to describe a king’s reign (1 Kgs 10:21) or the extent of an individual’s life (Gn 5:4; 1 Kgs 3:14; Ps 90:12). God is described in the book of Daniel as the “Ancient of Days” (Dn 7:9, 13).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the Sabbath (Gn 2:3; Ex 20:8-11), which was reserved for rest and worship, “day” was applied to the Passover celebration each spring (Ex 12:14; Lv 23:5) and the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:29-31) each autumn. As with the Sabbath, no work was performed on those occasions; prescribed religious rituals were observed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestament\">New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the use of “day” followed Semitic usage to some extent, although the four military night watches were of Greek and Roman origin. The 12-hour day of NT times was a legacy of Babylonian astronomy (cf. Jn 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the literal usage of “day,” NT authors sometimes employed it figuratively, as in such expressions as the “day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2) and the “day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). Or they described specified periods of time, as in the “days of his Temple duties” (Lk 1:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Special feasts mentioned include the Passover (Jn 12:1), the days of Unleavened Bread (Acts 12:3), and the Day of Pentecost (2:1).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the period of human life is described as days (Jn 9:4). Christians are called “children of the light and of the day” (1 Thes 5:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Longer periods or eras are referred to as days (2 Cor 6:2; Eph 5:16; 6:13; Heb 5:7). The ominous note struck by the Hebrew prophets about a day of judgment is matched by NT stress on a day of final divine judgment when the Son of Man (Jesus) will reveal himself as Lord (Lk 17:30; Jn 6:39-44; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Pt 2:9; 3:7, 12; 1 Jn 4:17; Rv 16:14). The “day of eternity” marks that point at which time will become eternity (2 Pt 3:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new Jerusalem, dwelling place of God’s people, is described as a place of perpetual day (Rv 21:25).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Day of the Lord; Eschatology.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DAY Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckonin...","summary_en":"DAY Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckonin...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11322,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eve","title_en":"Eve","content_ro":"<h3>EVE<\/h3>\n<p>First woman, “the mother of all living” (Gn 3:20). The book of Genesis recounts that after God had finished his creation of Adam, he saw that it was not good for Adam to be alone. He decided to create “a helper fit for him” (2:18). The woman is called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ezer<\/span> (in Hebrew lit. “help”), a word that appears elsewhere in the OT in reference to God as Israel’s help. Causing Adam to fall into a deep sleep, God took one of his ribs and used it to fashion Eve (vv 21-25).<\/p>\n<p>Eve was given two names by Adam. The first was “woman,” a generic designation with theological connotations that denote her relationship to man (Gn 2:23). The second, Eve (“life”), was given after the fall and refers to her role in the procreation of the human race (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>Adam and Eve are pictured as living in Eden, serving God and fulfilling each other’s needs. Then evil entered when Eve was tempted by the serpent to disobey God’s command, which forbade their eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gn 2:17; 3:3). Tricked by the serpent’s subtle persuasion, Eve transgressed God’s will by eating the fruit. Adam did the same when she brought some to him, although he was not deceived as she had been. Both then recognized their nakedness and made garments of fig leaves.<\/p>\n<p>When God came to commune with them, they hid from him. When he demanded an account, Adam blamed Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent. God told Eve that as a result of their sin, childbirth would be a painful experience and her husband would rule over her (Gn 3:16). Eve later became the mother of Cain, Abel, Seth, and other children (4:1-2, 25; 5:4).<\/p>\n<p>Eve is mentioned twice in the NT. In his letter to Timothy, the apostle Paul referred to her when discussing whether or not women could teach (1 Tm 2:13). He said that a woman could not teach or have authority over a man because of man’s priority in creation and Eve’s responsibility for the original transgression (see 2 Cor 11:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adam (Person); Garden of Eden.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EVE<\/h3>\n<p>First woman, “the mother of all living” (Gn 3:20). The book of Genesis recounts that after God had finished his creation of Adam, he saw that it was not good for Adam to be alone. He decided to create “a helper fit for him” (2:18). The woman is called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ezer<\/span> (in Hebrew lit. “help”), a word that appears elsewhere in the OT in reference to God as Israel’s help. Causing Adam to fall into a deep sleep, God took one of his ribs and used it to fashion Eve (vv 21-25).<\/p>\n<p>Eve was given two names by Adam. The first was “woman,” a generic designation with theological connotations that denote her relationship to man (Gn 2:23). The second, Eve (“life”), was given after the fall and refers to her role in the procreation of the human race (3:20).<\/p>\n<p>Adam and Eve are pictured as living in Eden, serving God and fulfilling each other’s needs. Then evil entered when Eve was tempted by the serpent to disobey God’s command, which forbade their eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gn 2:17; 3:3). Tricked by the serpent’s subtle persuasion, Eve transgressed God’s will by eating the fruit. Adam did the same when she brought some to him, although he was not deceived as she had been. Both then recognized their nakedness and made garments of fig leaves.<\/p>\n<p>When God came to commune with them, they hid from him. When he demanded an account, Adam blamed Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent. God told Eve that as a result of their sin, childbirth would be a painful experience and her husband would rule over her (Gn 3:16). Eve later became the mother of Cain, Abel, Seth, and other children (4:1-2, 25; 5:4).<\/p>\n<p>Eve is mentioned twice in the NT. In his letter to Timothy, the apostle Paul referred to her when discussing whether or not women could teach (1 Tm 2:13). He said that a woman could not teach or have authority over a man because of man’s priority in creation and Eve’s responsibility for the original transgression (see 2 Cor 11:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adam (Person); Garden of Eden.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EVE First woman, “the mother of all living” (Gn 3:20). The book of Genesis recounts that after God had finished his creation of Adam, he saw that it was not good for Adam to be alone. He decided to create “a helper fit for him” (2:18). The woman is called ezer (in Hebrew lit. “help”), a word that appears elsewhere in the OT in reference to God as Israel’s help. Causing Adam to fall into a deep sleep, God took one of his ribs and used it to fashion Eve (vv 21-25). Eve was given two names by Ad...","summary_en":"EVE First woman, “the mother of all living” (Gn 3:20). The book of Genesis recounts that after God had finished his creation of Adam, he saw that it was not good for Adam to be alone. He decided to create “a helper fit for him” (2:18). The woman is called ezer (in Hebrew lit. “help”), a word that appears elsewhere in the OT in reference to God as Israel’s help. Causing Adam to fall into a deep sleep, God took one of his ribs and used it to fashion Eve (vv 21-25). Eve was given two names by Ad...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40438,"type":"picture","type_label":"Imagine","type_icon":"🖼️","type_color":"#ec4899","title_ro":"Old Latin Text of Genesis","title_en":"Old Latin Text of Genesis","content_ro":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>Old Latin Text of Genesis<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Genesis 5:4–6:2 from Oxyrhynchus, fifth century <span>AD<\/span><\/p>","content_en":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>Old Latin Text of Genesis<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Genesis 5:4–6:2 from Oxyrhynchus, fifth century <span>AD<\/span><\/p>","summary_ro":"Old Latin Text of Genesis Genesis 5:4–6:2 from Oxyrhynchus, fifth century AD","summary_en":"Old Latin Text of Genesis Genesis 5:4–6:2 from Oxyrhynchus, fifth century AD","source":"Pictures\/Pictures.xml","external_url":"..\/Pictures\/artfiles\/latin.jpg","has_map":false,"has_picture":true}],"5":[{"id":42907,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","summary_en":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70533,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","summary_en":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98159,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","summary_en":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125785,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:5","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:5<\/strong> <em>he died:<\/em> Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","summary_en":"5:5 he died: Death indeed came to Adam (see 2:17; 3:18-19) and his descendants (see Rom 5:12-14). Cain’s violence is omitted (see Gen 4:8, 15, 23-24) and key figures in Seth’s line live in hope (5:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":10831,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Enosh","title_en":"Enosh","content_ro":"<h3>ENOSH<\/h3>\n<p>Seth’s son and the grandson of Adam (Gn 4:26; 1 Chr 1:1). He became the father of Kenan at 90 years of age, after which he fathered other sons and daughters, dying at the age of 905 (Gn 5:6-11). He is mentioned as Jesus’ ancestor in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:38; <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span> “Enos”). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ENOSH<\/h3>\n<p>Seth’s son and the grandson of Adam (Gn 4:26; 1 Chr 1:1). He became the father of Kenan at 90 years of age, after which he fathered other sons and daughters, dying at the age of 905 (Gn 5:6-11). He is mentioned as Jesus’ ancestor in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:38; <span>kjv<\/span>, <span>rsv<\/span> “Enos”). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ENOSH Seth’s son and the grandson of Adam (Gn 4:26; 1 Chr 1:1). He became the father of Kenan at 90 years of age, after which he fathered other sons and daughters, dying at the age of 905 (Gn 5:6-11). He is mentioned as Jesus’ ancestor in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:38; kjv, rsv “Enos”). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","summary_en":"ENOSH Seth’s son and the grandson of Adam (Gn 4:26; 1 Chr 1:1). He became the father of Kenan at 90 years of age, after which he fathered other sons and daughters, dying at the age of 905 (Gn 5:6-11). He is mentioned as Jesus’ ancestor in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:38; kjv, rsv “Enos”). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42908,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","summary_en":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70534,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","summary_en":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98160,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","summary_en":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125786,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:6","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:6<\/strong> <em>the father of:<\/em> Or <em>the ancestor of;<\/em> Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","summary_en":"5:6 the father of: Or the ancestor of; Hebrew genealogies do not necessarily list every single generation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":5943,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cainan","title_en":"Cainan","content_ro":"<h3>CAINAN<\/h3>\n<li>1. A son of Arphaxad (Lk 3:36; Gn 10:24, LXX; 11:12-13).<\/li>\n<li>2. Adam’s great-grandson, also called Kenan (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). <em>See<\/em> Kenan.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>CAINAN<\/h3>\n<li>1. A son of Arphaxad (Lk 3:36; Gn 10:24, LXX; 11:12-13).<\/li>\n<li>2. Adam’s great-grandson, also called Kenan (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). <em>See<\/em> Kenan.<\/li>","summary_ro":"CAINAN 1. A son of Arphaxad (Lk 3:36; Gn 10:24, LXX; 11:12-13). 2. Adam’s great-grandson, also called Kenan (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). See Kenan.","summary_en":"CAINAN 1. A son of Arphaxad (Lk 3:36; Gn 10:24, LXX; 11:12-13). 2. Adam’s great-grandson, also called Kenan (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). See Kenan.","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21577,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kenan","title_en":"Kenan","content_ro":"<h3>KENAN<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth-generation descendant of Adam (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2); alternately called Cainan in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KENAN<\/h3>\n<p>Fourth-generation descendant of Adam (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2); alternately called Cainan in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37, <span>rsv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KENAN Fourth-generation descendant of Adam (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2); alternately called Cainan in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37, rsv). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","summary_en":"KENAN Fourth-generation descendant of Adam (Gn 5:9-14; 1 Chr 1:2); alternately called Cainan in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37, rsv). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":24456,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marriage Customs Marriage","title_en":"Marriage Customs Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","summary_en":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":23923,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mahalaleel*, Mahalalel","title_en":"Mahalaleel*, Mahalalel","content_ro":"<h3>MAHALALEEL*, MAHALALEL<\/h3>\n<li>1. Kenan’s son and the father of Jared in Seth’s line (Gn 5:12-17; 1 Chr 1:2), also mentioned in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:37). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Perez’s son and a postexilic Judahite (Neh 11:4).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>MAHALALEEL*, MAHALALEL<\/h3>\n<li>1. Kenan’s son and the father of Jared in Seth’s line (Gn 5:12-17; 1 Chr 1:2), also mentioned in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:37). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Perez’s son and a postexilic Judahite (Neh 11:4).<\/li>","summary_ro":"MAHALALEEL*, MAHALALEL 1. Kenan’s son and the father of Jared in Seth’s line (Gn 5:12-17; 1 Chr 1:2), also mentioned in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:37). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Perez’s son and a postexilic Judahite (Neh 11:4).","summary_en":"MAHALALEEL*, MAHALALEL 1. Kenan’s son and the father of Jared in Seth’s line (Gn 5:12-17; 1 Chr 1:2), also mentioned in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:37). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Perez’s son and a postexilic Judahite (Neh 11:4).","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":18519,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jared","title_en":"Jared","content_ro":"<h3>JARED<\/h3>\n<p>Mahalalel’s son and a descendant of Seth. He was the father of Enoch (Gn 5:15-20; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JARED<\/h3>\n<p>Mahalalel’s son and a descendant of Seth. He was the father of Enoch (Gn 5:15-20; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JARED Mahalalel’s son and a descendant of Seth. He was the father of Enoch (Gn 5:15-20; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","summary_en":"JARED Mahalalel’s son and a descendant of Seth. He was the father of Enoch (Gn 5:15-20; 1 Chr 1:2; Lk 3:37). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":10826,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Enoch (Person)","title_en":"Enoch (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ENOCH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Cain’s son and grandson of Adam (Gn 4:17, 19).<\/li>\n<li>2. Jared’s son among the descendants of Seth; Methuselah’s father (Gn 5:18-24; 1 Chr 1:3). He lived in such close relationship to God that he was taken to heaven without having died.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ENOCH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Cain’s son and grandson of Adam (Gn 4:17, 19).<\/li>\n<li>2. Jared’s son among the descendants of Seth; Methuselah’s father (Gn 5:18-24; 1 Chr 1:3). He lived in such close relationship to God that he was taken to heaven without having died.<\/li>","summary_ro":"ENOCH (Person) 1. Cain’s son and grandson of Adam (Gn 4:17, 19). 2. Jared’s son among the descendants of Seth; Methuselah’s father (Gn 5:18-24; 1 Chr 1:3). He lived in such close relationship to God that he was taken to heaven without having died.","summary_en":"ENOCH (Person) 1. Cain’s son and grandson of Adam (Gn 4:17, 19). 2. Jared’s son among the descendants of Seth; Methuselah’s father (Gn 5:18-24; 1 Chr 1:3). He lived in such close relationship to God that he was taken to heaven without having died.","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":2294,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Apocalyptic*","title_en":"Apocalyptic*","content_ro":"<h3>APOCALYPTIC*<\/h3>\n<p>Term derived from a Greek word meaning “revelation” and used to refer to a pattern of thought and to a form of literature, both dealing with future judgment (eschatology).<\/p>\n<p>The literature designated “apocalyptic” consists of compositions that either are or purport to be divine revelations received by their authors. The revelations were usually received in the form of visions. They were recounted in detail and accompanied by an interpretation. The second half of Daniel (chs 7–12) is filled with such visions, as is the whole of Revelation. Although revelatory visions also occurred frequently in OT prophetic literature (e.g., Is 6; Am 7–9; Zec 1–6), they were particularly prominent in apocalyptic literature and determined the basic literary form and structure of such writings. Sometimes (as in Daniel) the revelatory message was received through a dream by the apocalyptic seer. In another form of vision (as in Revelation), the apocalyptist was caught up to the heavenly world, where he saw and heard things to be transmitted to the world of men (cf. Paul’s experience, 2 Cor 12:1-4). Frequently, the apocalyptist was unable to understand the meaning of the visions he received. In such instances an “interpreting angel” clarified the meaning of the vision (Dn 8:15-26; 9:20-27; 10:18–12:4; Rv 7:13-17; 17:7-18).<\/p>\n<p>Two primary patterns of eschatological thought are found in the Bible, both centered in the conviction that God will act in the near future to save his people and punish those who oppress them. In prophetic eschatology, the dominant form in the OT, God is expected to act within history to restore man and nature to the perfect condition that existed prior to man’s fall. Apocalyptic eschatology, on the other hand, expects God to destroy the old imperfect order before restoring the world to paradise.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel, apocalyptic eschatology evidently flourished under foreign domination. From the early sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, prophetic eschatology began to decline and apocalyptic eschatology became increasingly popular. The book of Daniel, written during the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, is the earliest example of apocalyptic literature in existence. The prophetic book of Malachi, written sometime during the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, was the last Israelite prophetic book. Thereafter, the prophetic voice became silent in Israel until the rise of Christianity. With the exception of Daniel, all the surviving Jewish apocalyptic literature was written from the third century <span>BC<\/span> to the early second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In apocalyptic literature, antagonism between God and Satan was sharply emphasized. All people, nations, and supernatural beings (angels, demons) were seen as allies of God or of Satan. Although Satan had always been thought of as the adversary of God and humanity (Gn 3:1-19; Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-8), his power was restrained as long as Israel remained faithful to the covenant law of God. When Israel began to experience the long national nightmare of subjugation by foreign enemies, the reality of Satan’s temporary domination of the world was brought home with great force. Though apocalyptic writers dealt with particular nations dominating Israel during one or another epoch in its history, those nations were seen as servants of Satan whose opposition to God (and God’s people) would inevitably spell their downfall.<\/p>\n<p>Apocalyptic thought was dominated by the conviction that, no matter how bad circumstances might be at any given moment, God and his people would ultimately triumph over their enemies. Apocalyptic determinism was not a fatalistic conviction that everything happened by a kind of mindless necessity; rather, it clung to hope in a sovereign God who would cause his people to experience ultimate victory over all temporal and spiritual enemies. Many apocalypses contained predictions of the future historical experience of Israel (or of the Christian church), culminating in a final and decisive victory of God and his people. In Nebuchadnezzar’s dream interpreted by Daniel, for example, a series of foreign empires was referred to under the symbolism of various parts of a gigantic image constructed of various materials; the image was destroyed by the kingdom of God, symbolized by a stone cut without hands from a mountain (Dn 2:31-45).<\/p>\n<p>A major difference between apocalyptic eschatology and prophetic eschatology was that apocalypticism nearly always envisaged a cosmic catastrophe prior to the final, decisive victory of God. In some apocalypses, such as the book of Daniel, God was expected to intervene decisively in the course of history, subdue evil, and introduce the kingdom of God. In others, such as the Revelation of John, God would first destroy the old world before creating a wholly new one (Rv 21:1; cf. 2 Pt 3:10). The general view was that things would get much worse before they got better. During the golden age of Israelite independence (10th through 7th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), the notion of future catastrophe was understandably not given much emphasis. However, after the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, apocalyptists thought the Jews’ problems could be reversed only by decisive and climactic intervention of God into the affairs of men and of nations.<\/p>\n<p>A common apocalyptic notion based on both dualism and pessimism was the concept of two “ages.” “This age,” which is present and evil, was dominated by Satan and his minions, but “the age to come” would bring the blessings of the kingdom of God. A constellation of eschatological events would serve to bring the old age to a close and inaugurate the new age. When Paul spoke of the “god of this evil world” (2 Cor 4:4), he was actually referring to Satan’s domination of “this age.”<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of apocalypticism was its frequent expression of intense longing for God to shorten the present evil days and quickly usher in the kingdom of God. Just as Daniel could ask, “How long shall it be till the end of these wonders?” (Dn 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), so John could exclaim, “Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rv 22:20). The desire for God’s speedy intervention and victory made it possible to maintain hope in thoroughly adverse circumstances and encouraged God’s people to conduct their lives in a manner worthy of the coming kingdom (2 Pt 3:11-13; Rv 21:5-8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Daniel is the only apocalypse in the OT canon of Scripture, and the book of Revelation the only apocalypse within the NT canon. Many noncanonical Jewish and Christian apocalypses survive, however. The Jewish apocalypses were written between the late third century <span>BC<\/span> and the early second century <span>AD<\/span>; the existing Christian apocalypses, from the second through the fourth centuries <span>AD<\/span>. Further, many apocalyptic literary patterns and structures are found outside the formal category of apocalyptic literature. The Olivet discourse of Jesus, for example (Mk 13; Mt 24; Lk 21), has frequently been called a little apocalypse by biblical scholars. In general, most of the features enumerated below must be present for a literary work to be considered “an apocalypse.”<\/p>\n<p>With the exception of Daniel and Revelation, most of the surviving apocalypses are pseudonymous, that is, they were written under a false name. This characteristic is such a constant feature that apocalyptic literature has been commonly referred to as “pseudepigrapha” (“false writings”). A composite apocalypse (1 Enoch) written by several unknown authors from the second century <span>BC<\/span> to probably the first century <span>AD<\/span> claimed to have been written by the Enoch who was an early descendant of Adam (Gn 5:21-24). Other Jewish apocalypses were attributed to such important OT characters as Adam and Eve, Moses, Isaiah, Baruch, Solomon, and Ezra. Since all were written after the close of the OT canon, their real authors probably thought that identification with some important OT personage was necessary for favorable reception. Early Christian apocalypses often bore the names of such important figures as Peter, Paul, and Thomas.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apocrypha for a discussion on each of the books just mentioned.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>APOCALYPTIC*<\/h3>\n<p>Term derived from a Greek word meaning “revelation” and used to refer to a pattern of thought and to a form of literature, both dealing with future judgment (eschatology).<\/p>\n<p>The literature designated “apocalyptic” consists of compositions that either are or purport to be divine revelations received by their authors. The revelations were usually received in the form of visions. They were recounted in detail and accompanied by an interpretation. The second half of Daniel (chs 7–12) is filled with such visions, as is the whole of Revelation. Although revelatory visions also occurred frequently in OT prophetic literature (e.g., Is 6; Am 7–9; Zec 1–6), they were particularly prominent in apocalyptic literature and determined the basic literary form and structure of such writings. Sometimes (as in Daniel) the revelatory message was received through a dream by the apocalyptic seer. In another form of vision (as in Revelation), the apocalyptist was caught up to the heavenly world, where he saw and heard things to be transmitted to the world of men (cf. Paul’s experience, 2 Cor 12:1-4). Frequently, the apocalyptist was unable to understand the meaning of the visions he received. In such instances an “interpreting angel” clarified the meaning of the vision (Dn 8:15-26; 9:20-27; 10:18–12:4; Rv 7:13-17; 17:7-18).<\/p>\n<p>Two primary patterns of eschatological thought are found in the Bible, both centered in the conviction that God will act in the near future to save his people and punish those who oppress them. In prophetic eschatology, the dominant form in the OT, God is expected to act within history to restore man and nature to the perfect condition that existed prior to man’s fall. Apocalyptic eschatology, on the other hand, expects God to destroy the old imperfect order before restoring the world to paradise.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel, apocalyptic eschatology evidently flourished under foreign domination. From the early sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, prophetic eschatology began to decline and apocalyptic eschatology became increasingly popular. The book of Daniel, written during the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, is the earliest example of apocalyptic literature in existence. The prophetic book of Malachi, written sometime during the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, was the last Israelite prophetic book. Thereafter, the prophetic voice became silent in Israel until the rise of Christianity. With the exception of Daniel, all the surviving Jewish apocalyptic literature was written from the third century <span>BC<\/span> to the early second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In apocalyptic literature, antagonism between God and Satan was sharply emphasized. All people, nations, and supernatural beings (angels, demons) were seen as allies of God or of Satan. Although Satan had always been thought of as the adversary of God and humanity (Gn 3:1-19; Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-8), his power was restrained as long as Israel remained faithful to the covenant law of God. When Israel began to experience the long national nightmare of subjugation by foreign enemies, the reality of Satan’s temporary domination of the world was brought home with great force. Though apocalyptic writers dealt with particular nations dominating Israel during one or another epoch in its history, those nations were seen as servants of Satan whose opposition to God (and God’s people) would inevitably spell their downfall.<\/p>\n<p>Apocalyptic thought was dominated by the conviction that, no matter how bad circumstances might be at any given moment, God and his people would ultimately triumph over their enemies. Apocalyptic determinism was not a fatalistic conviction that everything happened by a kind of mindless necessity; rather, it clung to hope in a sovereign God who would cause his people to experience ultimate victory over all temporal and spiritual enemies. Many apocalypses contained predictions of the future historical experience of Israel (or of the Christian church), culminating in a final and decisive victory of God and his people. In Nebuchadnezzar’s dream interpreted by Daniel, for example, a series of foreign empires was referred to under the symbolism of various parts of a gigantic image constructed of various materials; the image was destroyed by the kingdom of God, symbolized by a stone cut without hands from a mountain (Dn 2:31-45).<\/p>\n<p>A major difference between apocalyptic eschatology and prophetic eschatology was that apocalypticism nearly always envisaged a cosmic catastrophe prior to the final, decisive victory of God. In some apocalypses, such as the book of Daniel, God was expected to intervene decisively in the course of history, subdue evil, and introduce the kingdom of God. In others, such as the Revelation of John, God would first destroy the old world before creating a wholly new one (Rv 21:1; cf. 2 Pt 3:10). The general view was that things would get much worse before they got better. During the golden age of Israelite independence (10th through 7th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), the notion of future catastrophe was understandably not given much emphasis. However, after the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, apocalyptists thought the Jews’ problems could be reversed only by decisive and climactic intervention of God into the affairs of men and of nations.<\/p>\n<p>A common apocalyptic notion based on both dualism and pessimism was the concept of two “ages.” “This age,” which is present and evil, was dominated by Satan and his minions, but “the age to come” would bring the blessings of the kingdom of God. A constellation of eschatological events would serve to bring the old age to a close and inaugurate the new age. When Paul spoke of the “god of this evil world” (2 Cor 4:4), he was actually referring to Satan’s domination of “this age.”<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of apocalypticism was its frequent expression of intense longing for God to shorten the present evil days and quickly usher in the kingdom of God. Just as Daniel could ask, “How long shall it be till the end of these wonders?” (Dn 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span>), so John could exclaim, “Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rv 22:20). The desire for God’s speedy intervention and victory made it possible to maintain hope in thoroughly adverse circumstances and encouraged God’s people to conduct their lives in a manner worthy of the coming kingdom (2 Pt 3:11-13; Rv 21:5-8).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Daniel is the only apocalypse in the OT canon of Scripture, and the book of Revelation the only apocalypse within the NT canon. Many noncanonical Jewish and Christian apocalypses survive, however. The Jewish apocalypses were written between the late third century <span>BC<\/span> and the early second century <span>AD<\/span>; the existing Christian apocalypses, from the second through the fourth centuries <span>AD<\/span>. Further, many apocalyptic literary patterns and structures are found outside the formal category of apocalyptic literature. The Olivet discourse of Jesus, for example (Mk 13; Mt 24; Lk 21), has frequently been called a little apocalypse by biblical scholars. In general, most of the features enumerated below must be present for a literary work to be considered “an apocalypse.”<\/p>\n<p>With the exception of Daniel and Revelation, most of the surviving apocalypses are pseudonymous, that is, they were written under a false name. This characteristic is such a constant feature that apocalyptic literature has been commonly referred to as “pseudepigrapha” (“false writings”). A composite apocalypse (1 Enoch) written by several unknown authors from the second century <span>BC<\/span> to probably the first century <span>AD<\/span> claimed to have been written by the Enoch who was an early descendant of Adam (Gn 5:21-24). Other Jewish apocalypses were attributed to such important OT characters as Adam and Eve, Moses, Isaiah, Baruch, Solomon, and Ezra. Since all were written after the close of the OT canon, their real authors probably thought that identification with some important OT personage was necessary for favorable reception. Early Christian apocalypses often bore the names of such important figures as Peter, Paul, and Thomas.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apocrypha for a discussion on each of the books just mentioned.<\/p>","summary_ro":"APOCALYPTIC* Term derived from a Greek word meaning “revelation” and used to refer to a pattern of thought and to a form of literature, both dealing with future judgment (eschatology). The literature designated “apocalyptic” consists of compositions that either are or purport to be divine revelations received by their authors. The revelations were usually received in the form of visions. They were recounted in detail and accompanied by an interpretation. The second half of Daniel (chs 7–12) i...","summary_en":"APOCALYPTIC* Term derived from a Greek word meaning “revelation” and used to refer to a pattern of thought and to a form of literature, both dealing with future judgment (eschatology). The literature designated “apocalyptic” consists of compositions that either are or purport to be divine revelations received by their authors. The revelations were usually received in the form of visions. They were recounted in detail and accompanied by an interpretation. The second half of Daniel (chs 7–12) i...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25498,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Methuselah","title_en":"Methuselah","content_ro":"<h3>METHUSELAH<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Enoch, Lamech’s father, and the grandfather of Noah through Seth’s line (Gn 5:21-27; 1 Chr 1:3). Living 969 years, Methuselah is the oldest recorded person in the Bible. His lineage is included in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>METHUSELAH<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Enoch, Lamech’s father, and the grandfather of Noah through Seth’s line (Gn 5:21-27; 1 Chr 1:3). Living 969 years, Methuselah is the oldest recorded person in the Bible. His lineage is included in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"METHUSELAH Son of Enoch, Lamech’s father, and the grandfather of Noah through Seth’s line (Gn 5:21-27; 1 Chr 1:3). Living 969 years, Methuselah is the oldest recorded person in the Bible. His lineage is included in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","summary_en":"METHUSELAH Son of Enoch, Lamech’s father, and the grandfather of Noah through Seth’s line (Gn 5:21-27; 1 Chr 1:3). Living 969 years, Methuselah is the oldest recorded person in the Bible. His lineage is included in Luke’s genealogy of Christ (Lk 3:37). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":12241,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fellowship","title_en":"Fellowship","content_ro":"<h3>FELLOWSHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Communion with God, which results in common participation with other believers in the Spirit of God and God’s blessings.<\/p>\n<p>In the beginning Adam was placed in the Garden to enjoy friendship and communion with God. When Adam and Eve chose to assert their own autonomy rather than live under the Creator’s gracious care, the fellowship was broken. As a result, Adam and Eve hid themselves from the Lord’s presence (Gn 3:8). Yet God immediately sought them out and revealed his plan for the ultimate restoration of sinners through the work of the Redeemer (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>The OT tells how God began to draw a special people into fellowship with himself. Enoch is described as a man who walked with God (Gn 5:22, 24). Noah, likewise, walked in communion with the Lord (6:9). And Abraham, the father of Israel, is called “the friend of God” (Jas 2:23). No OT person had deeper fellowship with God than did Moses during his 40-day encounter with the Lord on Mt Sinai (Ex 24). Later in Israel’s history, David wrote psalms that reflect a heart vitally in tune with the living God (Pss 16, 34, 40, 63).<\/p>\n<p>As a result of Christ’s finished work on the cross, God now makes his permanent abode in each believer’s heart (Jn 14:23). As a result, the fellowship that now prevails under the new covenant is nothing less than the vital, spiritual union of the believer with Christ (vv 20-21). Fellowship with God is the goal of the Christian life (1 Jn 1:3), and this relationship will be perfected forever when we see our Savior “face to face” (1 Cor 13:12), when God dwells with his people in eternity (Rv 21:3).<\/p>\n<p>The gospel restores fellowship not only with God but also among believers. Jesus’ Last Supper with his disciples illustrates the relationship between the vertical and horizontal dimensions of fellowship (Mk 14:22-25). In the upper room, Jesus shared with his disciples a sacred love feast. The hearts of the Lord and his followers were knit together by a deep sense of love and commitment. Later, the disciples discovered that their own hearts were strongly united out of their common loyalty to Jesus. Following the cross and the outpouring of the Spirit, the church was born—that new society of people in fellowship with God and with one another.<\/p>\n<p>The depth of camaraderie among the first Christians is portrayed in the early chapters of Acts. The believers met together in house groups for teaching, fellowship, the Lord’s Supper, and prayer (Acts 2:42, 46). So profound was their sense of togetherness that the Christians pooled their possessions and distributed them to brothers and sisters in need (2:44-45; 4:32-35). Perhaps the dominant characteristic of this early Christian fellowship was the love among the believers (1 Thes 4:9; 1 Pt 1:22).<\/p>\n<p>Motivated by love, Paul organized among the gentile churches a collection for poor believers in Jerusalem. In Romans 15:26, which speaks of the gifts of the churches in Macedonia and Achaia, the word translated “contribution” is the common Greek word for “fellowship.” Similarly, the fellowship that the Philippian church shared with Paul assumed the form of gifts to support the apostle’s ministry (Phil 1:5; 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture uses several images to describe the spirit of togetherness that characterized the early church. The first is “the household of God” (Eph 2:19; 1 Tm 3:15), or “the household of faith” (Gal 6:10). In God’s household, love and hospitality are to be the rule (Heb 13:1-2). Further, the church is depicted as the family of God on earth (Eph 3:15). God is the Father, and believers are his faithful sons and daughters. The life of God’s family is to be governed by love, tenderness, compassion, and humility (Phil 2:1-4). Finally, the Christian fellowship is represented as the “one new man” or the “one body” (Eph 2:15-16). In spite of great natural diversity in the body, the Holy Spirit binds believers together into a single organism (4:4-6). In this fellowship of love, no believer is insignificant. Each member has been endowed with gifts for the spiritual edification of the entire body.<\/p>\n<p>Scripture lays down the basis of fellowship in 1 John 1:7: “If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus Christ, then, is the source and fount of all spiritual communion. Only when rightly related to the Lord do we experience true fellowship with another Christian. Just as light and darkness are incompatible, so a believer can have no real fellowship with an unbeliever. Neither can the Christian be in fellowship with one who walks contrary to the teaching of Christ (2 Jn 1:9-11), or a professing brother who is immoral, idolatrous, a drunkard, or a thief (1 Cor 5:11).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture lays down several guidelines for enhancing the communion of believers in the body: (1) Love one another with the same compassion that Christ displayed to his own (Jn 13:34-35; 15:12). The law of the fellowship should be the rule of love (Heb 13:1). (2) Cultivate that spirit of humility that seeks the other person’s honor (Phil 2:3-5). (3) Lighten fellow believers’ loads by bearing one another’s burdens (Gal 6:2). (4) Share material blessings with brothers and sisters in need (2 Cor 9:13). (5) Tenderly correct a sinner while helping to find solutions to the problems (Gal 6:1). (6) Succor a fellow believer in times of suffering (1 Cor 12:26). (7) Pray for one another in the Spirit without ceasing (Eph 6:18). The Christian will want to seriously regard the saying of an anonymous saint, “You cannot draw nigh to God if you are at a distance from your brother.”<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FELLOWSHIP<\/h3>\n<p>Communion with God, which results in common participation with other believers in the Spirit of God and God’s blessings.<\/p>\n<p>In the beginning Adam was placed in the Garden to enjoy friendship and communion with God. When Adam and Eve chose to assert their own autonomy rather than live under the Creator’s gracious care, the fellowship was broken. As a result, Adam and Eve hid themselves from the Lord’s presence (Gn 3:8). Yet God immediately sought them out and revealed his plan for the ultimate restoration of sinners through the work of the Redeemer (v 15).<\/p>\n<p>The OT tells how God began to draw a special people into fellowship with himself. Enoch is described as a man who walked with God (Gn 5:22, 24). Noah, likewise, walked in communion with the Lord (6:9). And Abraham, the father of Israel, is called “the friend of God” (Jas 2:23). No OT person had deeper fellowship with God than did Moses during his 40-day encounter with the Lord on Mt Sinai (Ex 24). Later in Israel’s history, David wrote psalms that reflect a heart vitally in tune with the living God (Pss 16, 34, 40, 63).<\/p>\n<p>As a result of Christ’s finished work on the cross, God now makes his permanent abode in each believer’s heart (Jn 14:23). As a result, the fellowship that now prevails under the new covenant is nothing less than the vital, spiritual union of the believer with Christ (vv 20-21). Fellowship with God is the goal of the Christian life (1 Jn 1:3), and this relationship will be perfected forever when we see our Savior “face to face” (1 Cor 13:12), when God dwells with his people in eternity (Rv 21:3).<\/p>\n<p>The gospel restores fellowship not only with God but also among believers. Jesus’ Last Supper with his disciples illustrates the relationship between the vertical and horizontal dimensions of fellowship (Mk 14:22-25). In the upper room, Jesus shared with his disciples a sacred love feast. The hearts of the Lord and his followers were knit together by a deep sense of love and commitment. Later, the disciples discovered that their own hearts were strongly united out of their common loyalty to Jesus. Following the cross and the outpouring of the Spirit, the church was born—that new society of people in fellowship with God and with one another.<\/p>\n<p>The depth of camaraderie among the first Christians is portrayed in the early chapters of Acts. The believers met together in house groups for teaching, fellowship, the Lord’s Supper, and prayer (Acts 2:42, 46). So profound was their sense of togetherness that the Christians pooled their possessions and distributed them to brothers and sisters in need (2:44-45; 4:32-35). Perhaps the dominant characteristic of this early Christian fellowship was the love among the believers (1 Thes 4:9; 1 Pt 1:22).<\/p>\n<p>Motivated by love, Paul organized among the gentile churches a collection for poor believers in Jerusalem. In Romans 15:26, which speaks of the gifts of the churches in Macedonia and Achaia, the word translated “contribution” is the common Greek word for “fellowship.” Similarly, the fellowship that the Philippian church shared with Paul assumed the form of gifts to support the apostle’s ministry (Phil 1:5; 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture uses several images to describe the spirit of togetherness that characterized the early church. The first is “the household of God” (Eph 2:19; 1 Tm 3:15), or “the household of faith” (Gal 6:10). In God’s household, love and hospitality are to be the rule (Heb 13:1-2). Further, the church is depicted as the family of God on earth (Eph 3:15). God is the Father, and believers are his faithful sons and daughters. The life of God’s family is to be governed by love, tenderness, compassion, and humility (Phil 2:1-4). Finally, the Christian fellowship is represented as the “one new man” or the “one body” (Eph 2:15-16). In spite of great natural diversity in the body, the Holy Spirit binds believers together into a single organism (4:4-6). In this fellowship of love, no believer is insignificant. Each member has been endowed with gifts for the spiritual edification of the entire body.<\/p>\n<p>Scripture lays down the basis of fellowship in 1 John 1:7: “If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus Christ, then, is the source and fount of all spiritual communion. Only when rightly related to the Lord do we experience true fellowship with another Christian. Just as light and darkness are incompatible, so a believer can have no real fellowship with an unbeliever. Neither can the Christian be in fellowship with one who walks contrary to the teaching of Christ (2 Jn 1:9-11), or a professing brother who is immoral, idolatrous, a drunkard, or a thief (1 Cor 5:11).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture lays down several guidelines for enhancing the communion of believers in the body: (1) Love one another with the same compassion that Christ displayed to his own (Jn 13:34-35; 15:12). The law of the fellowship should be the rule of love (Heb 13:1). (2) Cultivate that spirit of humility that seeks the other person’s honor (Phil 2:3-5). (3) Lighten fellow believers’ loads by bearing one another’s burdens (Gal 6:2). (4) Share material blessings with brothers and sisters in need (2 Cor 9:13). (5) Tenderly correct a sinner while helping to find solutions to the problems (Gal 6:1). (6) Succor a fellow believer in times of suffering (1 Cor 12:26). (7) Pray for one another in the Spirit without ceasing (Eph 6:18). The Christian will want to seriously regard the saying of an anonymous saint, “You cannot draw nigh to God if you are at a distance from your brother.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"FELLOWSHIP Communion with God, which results in common participation with other believers in the Spirit of God and God’s blessings. In the beginning Adam was placed in the Garden to enjoy friendship and communion with God. When Adam and Eve chose to assert their own autonomy rather than live under the Creator’s gracious care, the fellowship was broken. As a result, Adam and Eve hid themselves from the Lord’s presence (Gn 3:8). Yet God immediately sought them out and revealed his plan for the ...","summary_en":"FELLOWSHIP Communion with God, which results in common participation with other believers in the Spirit of God and God’s blessings. In the beginning Adam was placed in the Garden to enjoy friendship and communion with God. When Adam and Eve chose to assert their own autonomy rather than live under the Creator’s gracious care, the fellowship was broken. As a result, Adam and Eve hid themselves from the Lord’s presence (Gn 3:8). Yet God immediately sought them out and revealed his plan for the ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15830,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heaven","title_en":"Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","summary_en":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22817,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42909,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","summary_en":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70535,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","summary_en":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98161,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","summary_en":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125787,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:22","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:22<\/strong> <em>Enoch lived in close fellowship with God<\/em> (literally <em>Enoch walked with God<\/em>; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","summary_en":"5:22 Enoch lived in close fellowship with God (literally Enoch walked with God; also in 5:24): Enoch’s position as seventh from Adam in the genealogy strikes a contrast with Lamech, the seventh from Adam in the line of Cain (see study note on 4:17–5:32).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":13541,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Genesis","title_en":"Book of Genesis","content_ro":"<h3>GENESIS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First book of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">bere’shith<\/span><em>,<\/em> “in the beginning.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Genesis is closely related to the authorship of the entire Pentateuch (lit. “five-volumed,” the first five books of the Bible, which in Hebrew are called the Torah). It is clear that the Bible regards the human author of these books as Moses. On several occasions the Lord commanded Moses to write down various things: “in a book” (Ex 17:14) “write these words” (34:27). The Pentateuch reports that “Moses wrote all the words of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:4); he wrote the itinerary of the exodus wanderings (Nm 33:2); “Moses wrote this law” (Dt 31:9). (Here it is not certain that all five books are meant, but it must refer to at least the greater part of Deuteronomy.) In Exodus 24:7 it is said that Moses read the Book of the Covenant, which he must have just completed.<\/p>\n<p>The rest of the OT bears witness to the writing of the Pentateuch by Moses. David referred to “the law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3). In the time of Josiah, there was found in the temple the “Book of the Law of the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . given through Moses” (2 Chr 34:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Day by day Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of God” (Neh 8:18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus refers to “the book of Moses” (Mk 12:26; Lk 20:37) and otherwise mentions the commands or statements of Moses (Mt 8:4; 19:8; Mk 7:10; cf. Lk 16:31; 24:44). The Jews also quoted from the Torah as coming from Moses, and Jesus did not contradict them.<\/p>\n<p>Of Genesis in particular, it may be said that Moses had the opportunity and ability to write the book. He could have written it during his years in Egypt or while exiled with the Kenites. As the recognized leader of the Israelites, he would have had access to, or perhaps even custody of, the records that Jacob brought from Canaan. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22) and probably could have written in several languages and in several scripts (hieroglyphic, cuneiform, Old Hebrew). Although Moses was admirably fitted for the task of writing, one must remember that he was not putting together a human composition but was writing under the inspiration of God (2 Pt 1:21). We may with confidence conclude that Moses was the human author of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>The liberal view of the authorship of Genesis is that the book is an editorial composite—a view first put forward by a French physician, Jean Astruc, who suggested that the different names for God indicated different documents or sources for the writing of the book. The German higher critics expanded the view of the use of documents in the writing of Genesis and developed it into the Graf-Wellhausen-Kuenen, or Documentary, Hypothesis, which may also be called the JEDP theory of the authorship of the book. This view holds that there were four basic documents: (1) J, which uses the name YHWH (Jehovah or Yahweh) for God, dates from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> and comes from Judah; (2) E uses the name Elohim, dates from the eighth century, and comes from the northern kingdom; (3) D is Deuteronomy and is supposed to come from the time of Josiah, about 621 <span>BC<\/span>; and (4) P is the priestly element, which deals with matters of the priesthood and ritual, dating to the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> or later. Some may date portions of Genesis as late as the Hellenistic period. According to this theory, the various documents were blended together by editors, so that there was a JE, JED, and so on.<\/p>\n<p>The science of archaeology discredited many of the extreme postulations of these critics, and the work of W. F. Albright and his followers did much to restore confidence in the historicity of Genesis. Within the last several decades, the patriarchal narratives and the account of Joseph have again come under strong attack, but these views are extreme, and much of the evidence adduced by Albright and earlier scholars like R. D. Wilson, W. H. Green, and others still has validity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The date of the book is also a matter of debate. Even among those who accept Mosaic authorship there is debate as to when Moses lived. Based on the biblical data, Moses should have lived in the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Jgs 11:26; 1 Kgs 6:1), but many scholars incline toward a 13th-century date. As outlined above, the liberal view of the date of Genesis would be from the ninth to the fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>, with the final editing coming around the fifth century or perhaps even later.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Genesis sketches the origin of many things: the universe, the earth, plants, animals, and mankind. It gives the beginnings of human institutions, professions, and crafts. It describes the origin of sin and death, and illustrates the insidious working of Satan in human life. Above all, Genesis relates the beginning of the history of redemption with the announcement of a Redeemer who was to come (Gn 3:15). It names the early progenitors in the lineage of the Messiah and the beginning of the Hebrew people through whom the Bible and the Savior came. Genesis also gives a selective history of people and events as viewed from the perspective of the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The book is divided into 11 parts of uneven length, each set off by the expression “these are the generations [descendants, history] of” (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1; 37:2). Only three times does the formula coincide with the first verse of a chapter. Usually called a heading or superscription, the expression serves as a kind of link between what precedes and what follows.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Creation (1:1–2:25)<\/h5>\n<p>These two chapters have been a scientific-theological battleground for many years, as researchers and students have tried to probe the origins of the universe and of life. Much of the evidence is not subject to scientific scrutiny, for science by definition requires that the evidence must be reproducible by experiment.<\/p>\n<p>The statement of Genesis 1:1 remains the grandest, most precise, and most accurate statement of origins: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He did this <em>ex nihilo<\/em> (“out of nothing”) by his word (Heb 11:3); he spoke the word of command and it was done (Gn 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20; Ps 33:6, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The date of the beginning is unknown. Uniformitarian cosmogonists (students of the origins of the universe who believe that natural events have always followed a uniform pattern; cf. 2 Pt 3:3-7) have speculated that the beginning of the universe was billions of years ago. But some creationists posit a world thousands of years old.<\/p>\n<p>To accommodate geological ages and the existence of extinct animals, some interpreters have proposed a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, with Genesis 1:2–2:3 representing a second or new creation. But this is conjecture. So is the idea that each day represents a geological age.<\/p>\n<p>As the text stands, there is a correlation between the first three days and the second three days. Day one saw the creation of light; day four, the light bearers. Day two was the time of the creation of the firmament (better, “expanse”), which divided the waters; day five, birds and swarming water creatures. On day three, God made the dry land and plants; on day six he created the land animals and man. He made man in the image of God (Gn 1:26), “a little less than God” (Ps 8:5), and gave him dominion over the earth. He made everything “according to their kinds,” so that each kind is distinct and unique. The perfection of his work is affirmed in that “God saw that it was good” (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21; “very good,” v 31). The seventh day was a time of cessation from the activity of creating and served as a type for mankind’s day of rest (2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Critical scholarship eyes 2:4-25 as a doublet in conflict with Genesis 1:1–2:3. To conservative scholars, the second chapter is the same account from a different perspective. Chapter 1 gives the Creation from the standpoint of sequence; chapter 2 shows it in view of the centrality of mankind in God’s creative work.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 gives details of the creation of man of “dust from the ground” (v 7) and woman from a rib of the man (vv 21-22). She was created to be “a companion who will help him” (vv 18-20). They were created as mature adults, with the gift of speech and with great intelligence. Adam had imagination and vocabulary sufficient for naming all of the animal species (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Garden of Eden is given (vv 10-14). Two of the four rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, can be identified with certainty. So man lived in this beautiful garden in the bliss of innocence.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Humankind from Eden to Babel (3:1–11:26)<\/h5>\n<h6>The Fall<\/h6>\n<p>The loss of Eden and the break in fellowship with God is the saddest chapter in human history. The serpent, the devil, approached Eve with the same philosophy he always uses: doubt of God’s word (Gn 3:1), denial of death (v 4), and the suggestion of equality with God (v 5). He gained access to her will by deceiving her with the promise that the fruit would make her as wise as God is (Gn 3:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:16). Eve was deceived, but when she offered the fruit to Adam, he took it willingly, knowing what he was doing (Gn 3:6; cf. 1 Tm 2:14). Later, he tried to blame God for giving him the wife who gave him the fruit (Gn 3:12). Fellowship with God was broken (v 8), yet God came seeking Adam and found him.<\/p>\n<p>With sin came judgment, and the Lord pronounced righteous judgment on the serpent, the woman, and the man. The earth was also “subjected to frustration” and now groans as it awaits renewal (Rom 8:21-22). God gave hope to man and a promise of a Redeemer (Gn 3:15), who was to bruise the serpent’s head. Adam and Eve were forced out of the Garden, and it was made inaccessible to them.<\/p>\n<p>The impatience of humankind is shown in Eve’s expectation that her son Cain was the promised Deliverer. Instead, he developed a wrong-hearted attitude toward God and became so jealous of his younger brother that he murdered him. Apprehended by God and confronted with his crime, Cain showed only self-pity and went east from Eden, where he built a city (4:1-16). Chapter 4 closes with another contrast: the brazen Lamech, who called for vengeance, while others began to call upon the name of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>The Generations of Adam<\/h6>\n<p>This genealogical table (5:1-32) brings humankind to the time of Noah and the Flood. The longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs seems very striking to us, but one must remember that the earth had not yet been subjected to pollution and that the effects of sin on the human race were still nominal. The refrain “and he died” reminds us of man’s mortality. For Enoch, however, there was something better: “He enjoyed a close relationship with God throughout his life. Then, suddenly, he disappeared because God took him” (5:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>The Flood<\/h6>\n<p>With increased population came an eruption of sin (6:1-5). As men multiplied, so did their corruption. The universal condemnation of verse 5 shows a world ripe for judgment. Noah, however, “found favor with the <span>Lord<\/span>,” for he was a righteous and blameless man who walked with God (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord planned to annihilate the human race, but he determined to save Noah and his family. Intending to flood the earth, God instructed Noah to build an ark. Noah was directed to take animals aboard the ark, two by two, male and female, for the preservation of each species. When all was in readiness, the Flood came: “the underground waters burst forth on the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. The highest mountains were covered, and life outside the ark perished. “But God remembered Noah” and sent a wind to evaporate the waters (8:1). Eventually the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (v 4). Noah made a sacrifice to the Lord, and the Lord determined that he would never again bring such destruction upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Flood is another of God’s acts that has been much debated. Many have argued for a local flood, which affected only part of Mesopotamia. Archaeologists have pointed to various flood strata in the excavation of Mesopotamian city-mounds as evidence for the account of the flood and have cited the various flood stories from that area as the source of the Genesis record. The epic of Gilgamesh gives an interesting tale of this hero, who went on a mission to visit Utnapishtim, the cuneiform Noah, in quest of eternal life. The flood story told by Utnapishtim has many parallels to Genesis, but there are greater contrasts, which demonstrate that the Bible preserves the true account.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Genesis account and the references to it in the NT (cf. 2 Pt 3:6) favor the view that the deluge was not a minor episode in the Tigris-Euphrates area but was an unprecedented worldwide catastrophe. Christian geologists affirm that the Flood had far-reaching effects on the earth itself. Flood stories are almost universally known, lending support to the conclusion that the Flood covered the whole earth. Following the Flood, God blessed Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. God made a covenant with Noah, promising that he would never again send a worldwide flood. As a sign of this, he established the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>Noah was the first tiller of the soil, and he planted a vineyard (9:20). Noah became drunk from wine he made and lay uncovered in his tent. Ham saw him and reported this to his brothers, who discreetly covered him. Ham and his son Canaan were cursed; Shem and Japheth were blessed.<\/p>\n<h6>The History of the Nations<\/h6>\n<p>“This is the history of the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the three sons of Noah. Many children were born to them after the Flood” (10:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). This chapter lists the descendants of Noah’s three sons, in the order of Japheth (vv 2-5), Ham (vv 6-20), and Shem (vv 21-31). Many of the names of their descendants are preserved in tribes and nations of the world.<\/p>\n<h6>The Tower of Babel<\/h6>\n<p>The building of the Tower of Babel (“Gate of God”) illustrates man’s perversity and his tendency to want independence from God. The desire of man to displace God follows the fateful example of Lucifer and is a basic tenet of many cults. God thwarted the designs of the builders of Babel by confusing their languages, so that the project came to a halt (11:1-9). The site of this tower is not known with certainty. Some associate it with Birs Nimrud, not far from the ruins of the city of Babylon. Genesis 11:10-25 picks up the line of Shem and carries it down to Terah, the father of Abram.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Abraham (11:27–25:10) and Isaac (21:1–28:5)<\/h5>\n<p>Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees, a prosperous city. The city had an imposing ziggurat (temple-tower), with many temples, storehouses, and residences. Abram and Sarai, his half sister and wife, went with his father to Haran in Syria, which like Ur was a center of the worship of the moon god, Sin (or Annar).<\/p>\n<h6>Abram’s Call<\/h6>\n<p>The call of God came to Abram directing him to leave his relatives and move to a land that the Lord would show him (12:1; cf. Acts 7:2-3). Abram obeyed. At the age of 75, he, Sarai, and his nephew Lot left Haran and went to Shechem, where the Lord appeared to him and promised that land to his descendants.<\/p>\n<p>Famine drove Abram down to Egypt (Gn 12:10-20). Because of Sarai’s beauty, he feared that someone might kill him to get her, so he passed her off as his sister. She was taken into the pharaoh’s harem. When the Lord plagued Pharaoh because of this, Abram’s lie was discovered and Sarai was returned to him.<\/p>\n<h6>Abram and Lot<\/h6>\n<p>Abram and Lot returned to Canaan, where strife broke out between Abram’s herdsmen and those of Lot. Abram suggested that they should separate, and he gave Lot the choice of territory. Lot chose the well-watered Jordan Valley and the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah (ch 13).<\/p>\n<h6>The Invasion of the Four Kings from the East<\/h6>\n<p>The four kings who invaded along the King’s Highway in Transjordan cannot be identified with certainty. Those kings were successful in their attack against the five cities of the plain, and they moved off with much booty and many captives, including Lot. Abram took 318 retainers, born in his household, and set off after them. By surprise attack, Abram recovered both Lot and the loot. On his return he was met by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem, to whom Abram paid tithes (ch 14).<\/p>\n<h6>The Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord promised Abram a son as heir, and in an impressive nighttime ceremony, God made a covenant with Abram and promised him the land from the River of Egypt (Wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates (ch 15). Because of her own barrenness, Sarai gave her Egyptian maid, Hagar, to Abram. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arab peoples. When trouble arose between the women, Sarai sent Hagar away, which was her right according to Near Eastern customs (as illustrated by the Nuzi tablets). God showed mercy to Hagar and promised that she would have a great posterity (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>God repeated his promise to Abram concerning his descendants and changed the names of Abram (“exalted father”) and Sarai to Abraham (“father of many”) and Sarah (“princess”). A covenant sign of circumcision was given to Abraham (ch 17). This operation had already been practiced among the Egyptians for several centuries.<\/p>\n<h6>The Destruction of the Cities of the Plain<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord and two angels appeared to Abraham and announced the birth of the promised heir within a year, as well as proclaimed the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, concerning which Abraham bargained with God (18:22-33). Lot and his immediate family were rescued from Sodom, and the cities were destroyed by God with brimstone and fire (19:24-25). Lot’s two daughters, wishing to preserve their family line, got their father drunk and had sexual relations with him. Moab and Ammon, enemies of Israel in later times, were the result.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 20:1-18, Abraham again represented Sarah as his sister and got into trouble with Abimelech, king of Gerar.<\/p>\n<h6>Isaac<\/h6>\n<p>When Isaac was born (21:1-3), trouble again broke out between Sarah and Hagar. Hagar was driven out a second time, and once more was befriended by the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>A disagreement arose between Abraham and Abimelech concerning a well, but they made a covenant of peace at Beersheba (21:25-34).<\/p>\n<p>God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah, which probably is the same site David later bought from Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-25), the place where the temple was to stand. As Abraham was about to use the knife, God called to him and showed him a ram caught in a thicket. Isaac was freed and the animal was sacrificed in his stead.<\/p>\n<p>Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite (ch 23), in a transaction typical of Near Eastern business dealings. To find a wife for Isaac, Abraham sent his servant Eliezer back to the area of Haran, and the Lord directed Eliezer to Rebekah (ch 24).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 records the marriage of Abraham to Keturah, who bore him a number of children. Abraham died at the age of 175 years and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Jacob and Esau (25:19–37:1)<\/h5>\n<p>Rebekah gave birth to twin sons, Esau and Jacob. When the boys were grown, Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a meal of red pottage (25:27-34).<\/p>\n<p>When famine came to the land, Isaac went to Gerar, as his father had done (ch 20), and repeated his father’s lie by calling his wife his sister (26:1-11). Trouble arose with the Philistines over wells, but Isaac was a peaceable man and preferred digging new wells rather than fighting over old ones (vv 17-33).<\/p>\n<p>In Isaac’s old age, when his sight had failed, Rebekah connived with Jacob to trick Isaac into giving to Jacob the blessing of the firstborn, which was rightfully Esau’s. This oral blessing had legal validity and was irrevocable, according to the ancient Nuzi tablets. Fearing for Jacob’s life at the hands of Esau, Rebekah arranged to send Jacob to Haran to find a wife from among her own people. At Bethel, God appeared to Jacob in a dream of a ladder leading up to heaven; God renewed with Jacob the promise made to Abraham and Isaac (28:10-22).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob reached Haran, found his uncle Laban, and was employed by him (ch 29). His wages for seven years of labor were to be Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel, as his wife. But Laban substituted Leah, so that Jacob had to work another seven years for Rachel. The Lord prospered Jacob, but he continually had difficulties with Laban. The Lord directed Jacob back to Canaan (31:3), so he left secretly with his wives, children, and property. Laban pursued them because his household gods were missing (possession of these “gods” made the holder heir to the owner’s estate, according to Nuzi custom). Rachel had taken them but successfully concealed them from her father, and Laban went back to Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Fearing a meeting with Esau as they passed through Edom, Jacob sent gifts to his brother and divided his own party into two camps for security. On this return journey, Jacob had an unexpected wrestling bout with the Angel of the Lord, and he was left with a limp and a new name, Israel (ch 32).<\/p>\n<p>The meeting with Esau was friendly, and Jacob went on to Shechem (ch 33), where his sons killed the male Shechemites because of the rape of their sister Dinah (ch 34). God told Jacob to go to Bethel and build an altar to the Lord. All idols of foreign gods were buried (35:1-4). At Bethel, God reaffirmed his promise of a posterity and the land (vv 9-15). Rachel died on the way to Bethlehem, while giving birth to Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th and last son. Isaac died at Hebron at age 180 and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by Esau and Jacob.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 36 records “the generations of Esau” (v 1). Here Esau is also named Edom (“Red”; cf. 25:30).<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Joseph (37:2–50:26)<\/h5>\n<p>Joseph was Jacob’s favorite son and thus incurred the jealousy of his brothers. This was heightened by Joseph’s dreams of lordship over them. Their resentment of Joseph came to a climax when Jacob gave Joseph a beautiful coat. The brothers determined to kill Joseph, but they compromised by selling him to a caravan of merchants, who took him to Egypt and sold him as a slave to Potiphar, an Egyptian captain of the guard (37:36; 39:1).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 38 relates a historic case of levirate marriage. Judah failed to give his widowed daughter-in-law to his third son. She deceived him into fathering twin sons and forced him to acknowledge his faults. The elder son, Perez, is named in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord blessed Joseph, who soon was put in charge of Potiphar’s household (Gn 39). The young man attracted the attention of Potiphar’s wife, who, after many attempts to seduce him, at last accused him of attempted rape. Sentenced on this charge, Joseph met with favor in prison, where he had opportunity to interpret dreams for two of the pharaoh’s servants (ch 40). When the king had dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret, Joseph was summoned from jail. Joseph told Pharaoh that the dreams meant seven years of plenty, followed by seven years of famine. Joseph was then exalted to the office of vizier, or prime minister, second only to the king, and put in charge of the administration of the land (41:37-44).<\/p>\n<p>When the famine came to Palestine, Jacob sent his sons to Egypt to purchase grain. Joseph recognized his brothers but did not reveal his identity to them. Joseph put them to the test by accusing them of being spies (42:9), by keeping one of the brothers (Simeon) hostage (v 19), and by demanding that if they came to Egypt again, they must bring their youngest brother with them (42:20; 43:3). The famine became so severe in Canaan (43:1) that Jacob at last allowed Benjamin to go with his brothers to Egypt. The brothers were again set up by Joseph, who had his silver cup put into Benjamin’s grain sack and then had him apprehended as a thief (ch 44).<\/p>\n<p>At this point Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers (45:4-15) and there was much rejoicing. Joseph pointed out that it was God who had sent him to Egypt (vv 7-8), in order to preserve the lives of all the family. Jacob was then sent for (46:1), and Joseph met him in the land of Goshen (46:28-29). The Israelites were assigned land in the region of Goshen, where they prospered (47:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jacob’s final illness, Joseph brought his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to his father for his blessing. Jacob gave the primary blessing to the second-born, Ephraim (48:13-20). Jacob blessed each of his own sons and then died at the age of at least 130 years. Joseph arranged for Jacob’s body to be prepared for burial according to Egyptian custom (50:2-3). After the burial of their father in the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, Joseph’s brothers worried about vengeance, but Joseph declared, “As far as I am concerned, God turned into good what you meant for evil. He brought me to the high position I have today so I could save the lives of many people” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph died at age 110 with the prophetic request that when the Israelites went up from Egypt they would take his bones with them (50:25; cf. Ex 13:19; Jos 24:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Adam (Person); Covenant; Creation; Eve; Fall of Man; Flood, The; Isaac; Jacob #1; Joseph #1; Nations; Noah #1; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GENESIS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First book of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">bere’shith<\/span><em>,<\/em> “in the beginning.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Genesis is closely related to the authorship of the entire Pentateuch (lit. “five-volumed,” the first five books of the Bible, which in Hebrew are called the Torah). It is clear that the Bible regards the human author of these books as Moses. On several occasions the Lord commanded Moses to write down various things: “in a book” (Ex 17:14) “write these words” (34:27). The Pentateuch reports that “Moses wrote all the words of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:4); he wrote the itinerary of the exodus wanderings (Nm 33:2); “Moses wrote this law” (Dt 31:9). (Here it is not certain that all five books are meant, but it must refer to at least the greater part of Deuteronomy.) In Exodus 24:7 it is said that Moses read the Book of the Covenant, which he must have just completed.<\/p>\n<p>The rest of the OT bears witness to the writing of the Pentateuch by Moses. David referred to “the law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3). In the time of Josiah, there was found in the temple the “Book of the Law of the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . given through Moses” (2 Chr 34:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Day by day Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of God” (Neh 8:18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus refers to “the book of Moses” (Mk 12:26; Lk 20:37) and otherwise mentions the commands or statements of Moses (Mt 8:4; 19:8; Mk 7:10; cf. Lk 16:31; 24:44). The Jews also quoted from the Torah as coming from Moses, and Jesus did not contradict them.<\/p>\n<p>Of Genesis in particular, it may be said that Moses had the opportunity and ability to write the book. He could have written it during his years in Egypt or while exiled with the Kenites. As the recognized leader of the Israelites, he would have had access to, or perhaps even custody of, the records that Jacob brought from Canaan. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22) and probably could have written in several languages and in several scripts (hieroglyphic, cuneiform, Old Hebrew). Although Moses was admirably fitted for the task of writing, one must remember that he was not putting together a human composition but was writing under the inspiration of God (2 Pt 1:21). We may with confidence conclude that Moses was the human author of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>The liberal view of the authorship of Genesis is that the book is an editorial composite—a view first put forward by a French physician, Jean Astruc, who suggested that the different names for God indicated different documents or sources for the writing of the book. The German higher critics expanded the view of the use of documents in the writing of Genesis and developed it into the Graf-Wellhausen-Kuenen, or Documentary, Hypothesis, which may also be called the JEDP theory of the authorship of the book. This view holds that there were four basic documents: (1) J, which uses the name YHWH (Jehovah or Yahweh) for God, dates from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> and comes from Judah; (2) E uses the name Elohim, dates from the eighth century, and comes from the northern kingdom; (3) D is Deuteronomy and is supposed to come from the time of Josiah, about 621 <span>BC<\/span>; and (4) P is the priestly element, which deals with matters of the priesthood and ritual, dating to the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> or later. Some may date portions of Genesis as late as the Hellenistic period. According to this theory, the various documents were blended together by editors, so that there was a JE, JED, and so on.<\/p>\n<p>The science of archaeology discredited many of the extreme postulations of these critics, and the work of W. F. Albright and his followers did much to restore confidence in the historicity of Genesis. Within the last several decades, the patriarchal narratives and the account of Joseph have again come under strong attack, but these views are extreme, and much of the evidence adduced by Albright and earlier scholars like R. D. Wilson, W. H. Green, and others still has validity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The date of the book is also a matter of debate. Even among those who accept Mosaic authorship there is debate as to when Moses lived. Based on the biblical data, Moses should have lived in the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Jgs 11:26; 1 Kgs 6:1), but many scholars incline toward a 13th-century date. As outlined above, the liberal view of the date of Genesis would be from the ninth to the fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>, with the final editing coming around the fifth century or perhaps even later.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Genesis sketches the origin of many things: the universe, the earth, plants, animals, and mankind. It gives the beginnings of human institutions, professions, and crafts. It describes the origin of sin and death, and illustrates the insidious working of Satan in human life. Above all, Genesis relates the beginning of the history of redemption with the announcement of a Redeemer who was to come (Gn 3:15). It names the early progenitors in the lineage of the Messiah and the beginning of the Hebrew people through whom the Bible and the Savior came. Genesis also gives a selective history of people and events as viewed from the perspective of the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The book is divided into 11 parts of uneven length, each set off by the expression “these are the generations [descendants, history] of” (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1; 37:2). Only three times does the formula coincide with the first verse of a chapter. Usually called a heading or superscription, the expression serves as a kind of link between what precedes and what follows.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Creation (1:1–2:25)<\/h5>\n<p>These two chapters have been a scientific-theological battleground for many years, as researchers and students have tried to probe the origins of the universe and of life. Much of the evidence is not subject to scientific scrutiny, for science by definition requires that the evidence must be reproducible by experiment.<\/p>\n<p>The statement of Genesis 1:1 remains the grandest, most precise, and most accurate statement of origins: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He did this <em>ex nihilo<\/em> (“out of nothing”) by his word (Heb 11:3); he spoke the word of command and it was done (Gn 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20; Ps 33:6, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The date of the beginning is unknown. Uniformitarian cosmogonists (students of the origins of the universe who believe that natural events have always followed a uniform pattern; cf. 2 Pt 3:3-7) have speculated that the beginning of the universe was billions of years ago. But some creationists posit a world thousands of years old.<\/p>\n<p>To accommodate geological ages and the existence of extinct animals, some interpreters have proposed a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, with Genesis 1:2–2:3 representing a second or new creation. But this is conjecture. So is the idea that each day represents a geological age.<\/p>\n<p>As the text stands, there is a correlation between the first three days and the second three days. Day one saw the creation of light; day four, the light bearers. Day two was the time of the creation of the firmament (better, “expanse”), which divided the waters; day five, birds and swarming water creatures. On day three, God made the dry land and plants; on day six he created the land animals and man. He made man in the image of God (Gn 1:26), “a little less than God” (Ps 8:5), and gave him dominion over the earth. He made everything “according to their kinds,” so that each kind is distinct and unique. The perfection of his work is affirmed in that “God saw that it was good” (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21; “very good,” v 31). The seventh day was a time of cessation from the activity of creating and served as a type for mankind’s day of rest (2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Critical scholarship eyes 2:4-25 as a doublet in conflict with Genesis 1:1–2:3. To conservative scholars, the second chapter is the same account from a different perspective. Chapter 1 gives the Creation from the standpoint of sequence; chapter 2 shows it in view of the centrality of mankind in God’s creative work.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 gives details of the creation of man of “dust from the ground” (v 7) and woman from a rib of the man (vv 21-22). She was created to be “a companion who will help him” (vv 18-20). They were created as mature adults, with the gift of speech and with great intelligence. Adam had imagination and vocabulary sufficient for naming all of the animal species (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Garden of Eden is given (vv 10-14). Two of the four rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, can be identified with certainty. So man lived in this beautiful garden in the bliss of innocence.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Humankind from Eden to Babel (3:1–11:26)<\/h5>\n<h6>The Fall<\/h6>\n<p>The loss of Eden and the break in fellowship with God is the saddest chapter in human history. The serpent, the devil, approached Eve with the same philosophy he always uses: doubt of God’s word (Gn 3:1), denial of death (v 4), and the suggestion of equality with God (v 5). He gained access to her will by deceiving her with the promise that the fruit would make her as wise as God is (Gn 3:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:16). Eve was deceived, but when she offered the fruit to Adam, he took it willingly, knowing what he was doing (Gn 3:6; cf. 1 Tm 2:14). Later, he tried to blame God for giving him the wife who gave him the fruit (Gn 3:12). Fellowship with God was broken (v 8), yet God came seeking Adam and found him.<\/p>\n<p>With sin came judgment, and the Lord pronounced righteous judgment on the serpent, the woman, and the man. The earth was also “subjected to frustration” and now groans as it awaits renewal (Rom 8:21-22). God gave hope to man and a promise of a Redeemer (Gn 3:15), who was to bruise the serpent’s head. Adam and Eve were forced out of the Garden, and it was made inaccessible to them.<\/p>\n<p>The impatience of humankind is shown in Eve’s expectation that her son Cain was the promised Deliverer. Instead, he developed a wrong-hearted attitude toward God and became so jealous of his younger brother that he murdered him. Apprehended by God and confronted with his crime, Cain showed only self-pity and went east from Eden, where he built a city (4:1-16). Chapter 4 closes with another contrast: the brazen Lamech, who called for vengeance, while others began to call upon the name of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>The Generations of Adam<\/h6>\n<p>This genealogical table (5:1-32) brings humankind to the time of Noah and the Flood. The longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs seems very striking to us, but one must remember that the earth had not yet been subjected to pollution and that the effects of sin on the human race were still nominal. The refrain “and he died” reminds us of man’s mortality. For Enoch, however, there was something better: “He enjoyed a close relationship with God throughout his life. Then, suddenly, he disappeared because God took him” (5:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>The Flood<\/h6>\n<p>With increased population came an eruption of sin (6:1-5). As men multiplied, so did their corruption. The universal condemnation of verse 5 shows a world ripe for judgment. Noah, however, “found favor with the <span>Lord<\/span>,” for he was a righteous and blameless man who walked with God (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord planned to annihilate the human race, but he determined to save Noah and his family. Intending to flood the earth, God instructed Noah to build an ark. Noah was directed to take animals aboard the ark, two by two, male and female, for the preservation of each species. When all was in readiness, the Flood came: “the underground waters burst forth on the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. The highest mountains were covered, and life outside the ark perished. “But God remembered Noah” and sent a wind to evaporate the waters (8:1). Eventually the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (v 4). Noah made a sacrifice to the Lord, and the Lord determined that he would never again bring such destruction upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Flood is another of God’s acts that has been much debated. Many have argued for a local flood, which affected only part of Mesopotamia. Archaeologists have pointed to various flood strata in the excavation of Mesopotamian city-mounds as evidence for the account of the flood and have cited the various flood stories from that area as the source of the Genesis record. The epic of Gilgamesh gives an interesting tale of this hero, who went on a mission to visit Utnapishtim, the cuneiform Noah, in quest of eternal life. The flood story told by Utnapishtim has many parallels to Genesis, but there are greater contrasts, which demonstrate that the Bible preserves the true account.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Genesis account and the references to it in the NT (cf. 2 Pt 3:6) favor the view that the deluge was not a minor episode in the Tigris-Euphrates area but was an unprecedented worldwide catastrophe. Christian geologists affirm that the Flood had far-reaching effects on the earth itself. Flood stories are almost universally known, lending support to the conclusion that the Flood covered the whole earth. Following the Flood, God blessed Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. God made a covenant with Noah, promising that he would never again send a worldwide flood. As a sign of this, he established the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>Noah was the first tiller of the soil, and he planted a vineyard (9:20). Noah became drunk from wine he made and lay uncovered in his tent. Ham saw him and reported this to his brothers, who discreetly covered him. Ham and his son Canaan were cursed; Shem and Japheth were blessed.<\/p>\n<h6>The History of the Nations<\/h6>\n<p>“This is the history of the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the three sons of Noah. Many children were born to them after the Flood” (10:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). This chapter lists the descendants of Noah’s three sons, in the order of Japheth (vv 2-5), Ham (vv 6-20), and Shem (vv 21-31). Many of the names of their descendants are preserved in tribes and nations of the world.<\/p>\n<h6>The Tower of Babel<\/h6>\n<p>The building of the Tower of Babel (“Gate of God”) illustrates man’s perversity and his tendency to want independence from God. The desire of man to displace God follows the fateful example of Lucifer and is a basic tenet of many cults. God thwarted the designs of the builders of Babel by confusing their languages, so that the project came to a halt (11:1-9). The site of this tower is not known with certainty. Some associate it with Birs Nimrud, not far from the ruins of the city of Babylon. Genesis 11:10-25 picks up the line of Shem and carries it down to Terah, the father of Abram.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Abraham (11:27–25:10) and Isaac (21:1–28:5)<\/h5>\n<p>Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees, a prosperous city. The city had an imposing ziggurat (temple-tower), with many temples, storehouses, and residences. Abram and Sarai, his half sister and wife, went with his father to Haran in Syria, which like Ur was a center of the worship of the moon god, Sin (or Annar).<\/p>\n<h6>Abram’s Call<\/h6>\n<p>The call of God came to Abram directing him to leave his relatives and move to a land that the Lord would show him (12:1; cf. Acts 7:2-3). Abram obeyed. At the age of 75, he, Sarai, and his nephew Lot left Haran and went to Shechem, where the Lord appeared to him and promised that land to his descendants.<\/p>\n<p>Famine drove Abram down to Egypt (Gn 12:10-20). Because of Sarai’s beauty, he feared that someone might kill him to get her, so he passed her off as his sister. She was taken into the pharaoh’s harem. When the Lord plagued Pharaoh because of this, Abram’s lie was discovered and Sarai was returned to him.<\/p>\n<h6>Abram and Lot<\/h6>\n<p>Abram and Lot returned to Canaan, where strife broke out between Abram’s herdsmen and those of Lot. Abram suggested that they should separate, and he gave Lot the choice of territory. Lot chose the well-watered Jordan Valley and the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah (ch 13).<\/p>\n<h6>The Invasion of the Four Kings from the East<\/h6>\n<p>The four kings who invaded along the King’s Highway in Transjordan cannot be identified with certainty. Those kings were successful in their attack against the five cities of the plain, and they moved off with much booty and many captives, including Lot. Abram took 318 retainers, born in his household, and set off after them. By surprise attack, Abram recovered both Lot and the loot. On his return he was met by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem, to whom Abram paid tithes (ch 14).<\/p>\n<h6>The Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord promised Abram a son as heir, and in an impressive nighttime ceremony, God made a covenant with Abram and promised him the land from the River of Egypt (Wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates (ch 15). Because of her own barrenness, Sarai gave her Egyptian maid, Hagar, to Abram. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arab peoples. When trouble arose between the women, Sarai sent Hagar away, which was her right according to Near Eastern customs (as illustrated by the Nuzi tablets). God showed mercy to Hagar and promised that she would have a great posterity (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>God repeated his promise to Abram concerning his descendants and changed the names of Abram (“exalted father”) and Sarai to Abraham (“father of many”) and Sarah (“princess”). A covenant sign of circumcision was given to Abraham (ch 17). This operation had already been practiced among the Egyptians for several centuries.<\/p>\n<h6>The Destruction of the Cities of the Plain<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord and two angels appeared to Abraham and announced the birth of the promised heir within a year, as well as proclaimed the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, concerning which Abraham bargained with God (18:22-33). Lot and his immediate family were rescued from Sodom, and the cities were destroyed by God with brimstone and fire (19:24-25). Lot’s two daughters, wishing to preserve their family line, got their father drunk and had sexual relations with him. Moab and Ammon, enemies of Israel in later times, were the result.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 20:1-18, Abraham again represented Sarah as his sister and got into trouble with Abimelech, king of Gerar.<\/p>\n<h6>Isaac<\/h6>\n<p>When Isaac was born (21:1-3), trouble again broke out between Sarah and Hagar. Hagar was driven out a second time, and once more was befriended by the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>A disagreement arose between Abraham and Abimelech concerning a well, but they made a covenant of peace at Beersheba (21:25-34).<\/p>\n<p>God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah, which probably is the same site David later bought from Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-25), the place where the temple was to stand. As Abraham was about to use the knife, God called to him and showed him a ram caught in a thicket. Isaac was freed and the animal was sacrificed in his stead.<\/p>\n<p>Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite (ch 23), in a transaction typical of Near Eastern business dealings. To find a wife for Isaac, Abraham sent his servant Eliezer back to the area of Haran, and the Lord directed Eliezer to Rebekah (ch 24).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 records the marriage of Abraham to Keturah, who bore him a number of children. Abraham died at the age of 175 years and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Jacob and Esau (25:19–37:1)<\/h5>\n<p>Rebekah gave birth to twin sons, Esau and Jacob. When the boys were grown, Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a meal of red pottage (25:27-34).<\/p>\n<p>When famine came to the land, Isaac went to Gerar, as his father had done (ch 20), and repeated his father’s lie by calling his wife his sister (26:1-11). Trouble arose with the Philistines over wells, but Isaac was a peaceable man and preferred digging new wells rather than fighting over old ones (vv 17-33).<\/p>\n<p>In Isaac’s old age, when his sight had failed, Rebekah connived with Jacob to trick Isaac into giving to Jacob the blessing of the firstborn, which was rightfully Esau’s. This oral blessing had legal validity and was irrevocable, according to the ancient Nuzi tablets. Fearing for Jacob’s life at the hands of Esau, Rebekah arranged to send Jacob to Haran to find a wife from among her own people. At Bethel, God appeared to Jacob in a dream of a ladder leading up to heaven; God renewed with Jacob the promise made to Abraham and Isaac (28:10-22).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob reached Haran, found his uncle Laban, and was employed by him (ch 29). His wages for seven years of labor were to be Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel, as his wife. But Laban substituted Leah, so that Jacob had to work another seven years for Rachel. The Lord prospered Jacob, but he continually had difficulties with Laban. The Lord directed Jacob back to Canaan (31:3), so he left secretly with his wives, children, and property. Laban pursued them because his household gods were missing (possession of these “gods” made the holder heir to the owner’s estate, according to Nuzi custom). Rachel had taken them but successfully concealed them from her father, and Laban went back to Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Fearing a meeting with Esau as they passed through Edom, Jacob sent gifts to his brother and divided his own party into two camps for security. On this return journey, Jacob had an unexpected wrestling bout with the Angel of the Lord, and he was left with a limp and a new name, Israel (ch 32).<\/p>\n<p>The meeting with Esau was friendly, and Jacob went on to Shechem (ch 33), where his sons killed the male Shechemites because of the rape of their sister Dinah (ch 34). God told Jacob to go to Bethel and build an altar to the Lord. All idols of foreign gods were buried (35:1-4). At Bethel, God reaffirmed his promise of a posterity and the land (vv 9-15). Rachel died on the way to Bethlehem, while giving birth to Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th and last son. Isaac died at Hebron at age 180 and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by Esau and Jacob.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 36 records “the generations of Esau” (v 1). Here Esau is also named Edom (“Red”; cf. 25:30).<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Joseph (37:2–50:26)<\/h5>\n<p>Joseph was Jacob’s favorite son and thus incurred the jealousy of his brothers. This was heightened by Joseph’s dreams of lordship over them. Their resentment of Joseph came to a climax when Jacob gave Joseph a beautiful coat. The brothers determined to kill Joseph, but they compromised by selling him to a caravan of merchants, who took him to Egypt and sold him as a slave to Potiphar, an Egyptian captain of the guard (37:36; 39:1).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 38 relates a historic case of levirate marriage. Judah failed to give his widowed daughter-in-law to his third son. She deceived him into fathering twin sons and forced him to acknowledge his faults. The elder son, Perez, is named in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord blessed Joseph, who soon was put in charge of Potiphar’s household (Gn 39). The young man attracted the attention of Potiphar’s wife, who, after many attempts to seduce him, at last accused him of attempted rape. Sentenced on this charge, Joseph met with favor in prison, where he had opportunity to interpret dreams for two of the pharaoh’s servants (ch 40). When the king had dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret, Joseph was summoned from jail. Joseph told Pharaoh that the dreams meant seven years of plenty, followed by seven years of famine. Joseph was then exalted to the office of vizier, or prime minister, second only to the king, and put in charge of the administration of the land (41:37-44).<\/p>\n<p>When the famine came to Palestine, Jacob sent his sons to Egypt to purchase grain. Joseph recognized his brothers but did not reveal his identity to them. Joseph put them to the test by accusing them of being spies (42:9), by keeping one of the brothers (Simeon) hostage (v 19), and by demanding that if they came to Egypt again, they must bring their youngest brother with them (42:20; 43:3). The famine became so severe in Canaan (43:1) that Jacob at last allowed Benjamin to go with his brothers to Egypt. The brothers were again set up by Joseph, who had his silver cup put into Benjamin’s grain sack and then had him apprehended as a thief (ch 44).<\/p>\n<p>At this point Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers (45:4-15) and there was much rejoicing. Joseph pointed out that it was God who had sent him to Egypt (vv 7-8), in order to preserve the lives of all the family. Jacob was then sent for (46:1), and Joseph met him in the land of Goshen (46:28-29). The Israelites were assigned land in the region of Goshen, where they prospered (47:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jacob’s final illness, Joseph brought his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to his father for his blessing. Jacob gave the primary blessing to the second-born, Ephraim (48:13-20). Jacob blessed each of his own sons and then died at the age of at least 130 years. Joseph arranged for Jacob’s body to be prepared for burial according to Egyptian custom (50:2-3). After the burial of their father in the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, Joseph’s brothers worried about vengeance, but Joseph declared, “As far as I am concerned, God turned into good what you meant for evil. He brought me to the high position I have today so I could save the lives of many people” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph died at age 110 with the prophetic request that when the Israelites went up from Egypt they would take his bones with them (50:25; cf. Ex 13:19; Jos 24:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Adam (Person); Covenant; Creation; Eve; Fall of Man; Flood, The; Isaac; Jacob #1; Joseph #1; Nations; Noah #1; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GENESIS, Book of First book of the Bible. Preview • Name • Author • Date • Purpose • Structure • Content Name The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, bere’shith, “in the beginning.” Author The authorship of Gene...","summary_en":"GENESIS, Book of First book of the Bible. Preview • Name • Author • Date • Purpose • Structure • Content Name The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, bere’shith, “in the beginning.” Author The authorship of Gene...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42910,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","summary_en":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70536,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","summary_en":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98162,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","summary_en":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125788,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:24","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:24<\/strong> Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, <em>he disappeared, because God took him<\/em> (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","summary_en":"5:24 Unlike all other sons of Adam, Enoch did not succumb to death; rather, he disappeared, because God took him (cp. 2 Kgs 2:9-12; see also Heb 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":22429,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lamech","title_en":"Lamech","content_ro":"<h3>LAMECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsmen, musicians, and metalworkers. His song of vengeance (vv 23-24) is an example of early Hebrew poetry. In the song Lamech declares that he has killed a man for wounding him and compares the act to his forebear Cain’s slaying of Abel (cf. vv 8-12). He asserts that “if anyone who kills Cain is to be punished seven times, anyone who takes revenge against me will be punished seventy-seven times!” Lamech’s song indicates that, as civilization became more complex, pride and the propensity for violence increased. Jesus’ word about forgiving “seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) stands in sharp contrast to Lamech’s example.<\/li>\n<li>2. Methuselah’s son, and the father of Noah (Gn 5:25-31; 1 Chr 1:3). When Noah was born, Lamech expressed his hope that the child would bring relief to humanity from the curse placed upon Adam (Gn 5:29; cf. 3:17). His life span—777 years—is one of the longest in the listing of those who lived before the Flood. Fanciful conversations in old age between Lamech and his father, Methuselah, are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Lamech is listed as an ancestor of Jesus in the genealogy recorded in Luke 3:36.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsmen, musicians, and metalworkers. His song of vengeance (vv 23-24) is an example of early Hebrew poetry. In the song Lamech declares that he has killed a man for wounding him and compares the act to his forebear Cain’s slaying of Abel (cf. vv 8-12). He asserts that “if anyone who kills Cain is to be punished seven times, anyone who takes revenge against me will be punished seventy-seven times!” Lamech’s song indicates that, as civilization became more complex, pride and the propensity for violence increased. Jesus’ word about forgiving “seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) stands in sharp contrast to Lamech’s example.<\/li>\n<li>2. Methuselah’s son, and the father of Noah (Gn 5:25-31; 1 Chr 1:3). When Noah was born, Lamech expressed his hope that the child would bring relief to humanity from the curse placed upon Adam (Gn 5:29; cf. 3:17). His life span—777 years—is one of the longest in the listing of those who lived before the Flood. Fanciful conversations in old age between Lamech and his father, Methuselah, are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Lamech is listed as an ancestor of Jesus in the genealogy recorded in Luke 3:36.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMECH 1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsme...","summary_en":"LAMECH 1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":42911,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:27","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","summary_en":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70537,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:27","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","summary_en":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98163,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:27","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","summary_en":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125789,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:27","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:27<\/strong> <em>969 years:<\/em> This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","summary_en":"5:27 969 years: This statement and the numbers given in 5:25, 28 and 7:6 mean that Methuselah died in the year of the flood.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":40505,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68131,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95757,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123383,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Noah<\/h3>\n<p>Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil.<\/p>\n<p>God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for building the ark in which only the eight people of his family would be saved, along with every kind of creature (Gen 6:14–8:19). When Noah and his family finally emerged from the ark after the flood, Noah pleased God by building an altar and sacrificing burnt offerings. God promised that he would never again flood the whole earth or disrupt the sequence of the seasons, despite human sin (Gen 8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah’s sons were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. All the nations of the earth descended from them (Gen 9:18-19). When Noah became drunk on wine from his vineyard, his sons and their descendants were cursed or blessed in accord with how they responded to him (Gen 9:20-27). Noah lived for 950 years, including 350 years after the flood (Gen 9:28-29). He is an example of righteousness, obedience, courage, and faith (see Ezek 14:12-20; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 5:28–10:1; 1 Chr 1:4; Isa 54:9; Ezek 14:12-20; Matt 24:37-38; Luke 3:36; 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 1 Pet 3:20-21; 2 Pet 2:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","summary_en":"Noah Noah was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Seth (Gen 5:3-29). Lamech might have hoped that Noah (whose name means “rest” or “relief”) would ease the curse of hardship in working the ground. Instead, God used Noah to help relieve the world of evil. God intended to destroy creation because of pervasive human wickedness (Gen 6:1-7; see Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27), but he decided to preserve Noah (Gen 6:8). God gave Noah, a righteous and blameless man (Gen 6:9), precise instructions for b...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42912,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:28","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","summary_en":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70538,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:28","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","summary_en":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":98164,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:28","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","summary_en":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125790,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Geneza 5:28","title_en":"Study Note: Geneza 5:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>5:28-29<\/strong> As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. <em>Noah<\/em> sounds like Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nakham<\/span><em>,<\/em> “relief” or “comfort,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nuakh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father <em>Lamech<\/em> to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.<\/p>","summary_ro":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","summary_en":"5:28-29 As with Enoch (5:21-24), the normal genealogical formula is interrupted to highlight important theological information about Noah. Noah sounds like Hebrew nakham, “relief” or “comfort,” and nuakh, “rest.” As the first person born after Adam’s death (see study note on 5:5), Noah prompted his father Lamech to hope that the curse brought on by Adam’s sin (3:17) might be lifted. See 8:21; 2 Cor 1:3-7; 2 Thes 2:16-17.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":14211,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Names of God","title_en":"Names of God","content_ro":"<h3>GOD, Names of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalIdeaofName\">The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">onoma<\/span><em>)<\/em> is derived from a verb that means “to know.” A name, therefore, indicates that by which a person or object is to be known. But the idea of name is not to be taken in the sense of a label or an arbitrary means of identifying or specifying a person, place, or object. “Name” in biblical usage correctly describes the person, place, or object and indicates the essential character of that to which the name is given. Adam named the animals according to their nature (Gn 2:19-20); Noah means “one who brings relief and comfort” (5:29); Jesus means “savior” (Mt 1:21). When a person was given a new position or a radical change took place in his life, a new name was given to indicate that new aspect—for example, Abraham (“father of many,” Gn 17:5), and Israel (“one who strives with God” or “God strives,” 32:28). The name of a person or people expressed what the person or people thought the proper description or statement of character was.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the names of God, there are considerable differences, and these are most clearly seen when biblical scholars and theologians confront the question of whether the names of God are ascriptions given by God concerning himself or they are ascriptions given to God by people who observed his acts and reflected on his character as discerned through a study of divine deeds. Here are some examples of various kinds of divine names:<\/p>\n<p>1. Proper names: El, Yahweh, Adonai, Theos (God), Kurios (Lord).<\/p>\n<li>2. Personal names: Father, Abba, Son, Jesus, Holy Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>3. Titles: Creator, Messiah\/Christ, Paraclete\/Comforter.<\/li>\n<li>4. Essential names: Light, Love, Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>5. Descriptive names: Rock, Ba’al, Master, Rabboni, Shepherd.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheOldTestament\">The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>El and Related Names<\/h5>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is found over 200 times in the Hebrew Bible. It is best translated as “God.” The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> has a number of possible meanings. The root is thought by some to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’ul<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to be first” or “to be strong.” Others suggest the root is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to precede” and suggests “leader” or “commander.” It can also mean “to be afraid.” Thus God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> as the strong one, is to be feared. Still others suggest the preposition <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> (“to, toward”) as the root; the idea then is of “one giving self to others” or of “one to whom others go for help.” Some scholars suggest that the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alim<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bind,” should be considered as a root also—that is, “the strong one binds and holds firm control.” Common to these four suggested root meanings is the idea of strength, power, and of supreme excellence and greatness.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> in the OT is used particularly in the earlier books, where it describes God’s exercising dynamic power as distinguished from authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> speaks of God as the great doer and producer. He is the One who exercises such power that whatever is made, done, kept, or destroyed is his doing (cf. Ex 15). <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is also used to express the idea that God is not to be identified as part of creation but as the One who is above, behind, and beyond creation (Ps 19:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is also commonly used as the name of God, occurring over 2,500 times in the OT. There are differences of opinion concerning the exact origin and meaning of this plural name. Some have suggested that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is the plural form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>,<\/em> but it seems more likely that it is a plural of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which appears in the poetical writings. Some critical writers have suggested that this plural form is borrowed from pagan polytheistic sources, but no such plural form is found among pagans as the name of a deity. Others have suggested that the plural form is used to indicate the triune nature of God, and support for this has been seen in the use of a singular verb with this plural noun. The biblical doctrine of the Trinity, as it is developed throughout the Scriptures, does not appear to be based on the use of this plural form of God’s name, even though the two positions are not contradictory.<\/p>\n<p>The plural form, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>,<\/em> is best understood as expressing intensity. God makes himself known by this name as the Lord of intense and extensive glory and richness as he exercises his preeminence and power in the created cosmos. Hence, when the Scripture speaks of creation, it states, “In the beginning <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> created the heavens and the earth” (Gn 1:1). This name is repeated 35 times in Genesis 1 and 2 in connection with God’s power as revealed in Creation. In the book of Deuteronomy the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is used repeatedly to stress the majestic power of God that was shown in Israel’s release from bondage in Egypt, preservation in the wilderness, and preparation for entrance into the Promised Land. In this context, God <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also recognized as the Lawgiver who will powerfully execute judgment on covenant breakers. The psalmists also used this named repeatedly as they acknowledged and praised God the majestic ruler who had demonstrated his omnipotence in many dimensions of life (see Ps 68, in which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> appears 26 times.)<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to the use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> when God spoke to Abraham and said he would be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> to the patriarch and his seed; that is, God would be in a covenant relationship to them (Gn 17:1-8). Included in this relationship is the idea that God is ever ready to use his power on behalf of those who are in covenant with him. Thus, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Elohim<\/span> also expresses the concept of God’s faithfulness in regard to the covenant and the promises and blessings involved in it.<\/p>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> occurs mainly in the poetical writings, no fewer than 41 times in Job. Isaiah used it to express the incomparable character of God (Is 44:8). In like manner David asked, “Who is God [<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span>], but the <span>Lord<\/span>?” (2 Sm 22:32). Moses was the first to use the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> in his song (Dt 32:15-17), referring to Israel’s God in the context of the “no-gods,” which had been chosen in place of the Rock of salvation and the incomparable One. This name was probably used to stress the fact that God is the only true and living One, the One to be adored and worshiped; he is to be revered with a holy fear.<\/p>\n<p>Another closely related name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span><em>,<\/em> found in Ezra and Daniel. Some think <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is a Chaldee or Aramaic form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>.<\/em> Its root is said to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to fear” or “to be perplexed.” God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is the God to be feared and worshiped accordingly. In view of this meaning, it can be understood why, in the time of Israel’s exile and immediately after their return, this name was commonly used.<\/p>\n<p>Three other names of God include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>:<\/em><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Elyon<\/span> is the name used to designate the God of Melchizedek (Gn 14:18-22) as God Most High. In Psalms 57:2 and 78:56 the Hebrew reads <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim ‘Elyon<\/span><em>.<\/em> It is believed that the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “go up, be elevated, to be exalted.” There are a number of instances where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is used alone, but the context indicates that it is then used as a synonym for God (e.g., Nm 24:16; Ps 83:18; Is 14:14). The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘elyon<\/span> is used quite frequently as an adjective; it is then translated as “high, highest, upper, uppermost.” The basic ascription given to God when this name is employed is to One who is above all things as the maker, possessor, and ruler. He is incomparable in every way; he is subject to no one and no thing; he is the Exalted One.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is used in the longer form seven times in the Scriptures (Gn 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3; Ex 6:3; Ez 10:5). In the shorter form <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>),<\/em> it appears more frequently: in Job 30 times; in Psalms 19:1 and 68:14; once in Ruth (1:21), Isaiah (13:6), Ezekiel (1:24), and Joel (1:15). In these passages the combined ideas of God as the all-powerful, all-sufficient, transcendent, sovereign ruler and disposer are present. This meaning is generally accepted, but there are differences as to the exact meaning of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>.<\/em> Some have begun with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> as the first concept to be considered; its meaning is “breast, pap, or teat,” and it is considered a “precious metaphor” of the God who nourishes, supplies, and satisfies. The root of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadah<\/span><em>),<\/em> in Semitic usage, is to moisten. This meaning is not the preferred one in the context of which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> appears; nor is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> (demon), which some scholars have sought to use because it appears in Deuteronomy 32:17 and Psalm 106:37 speaking of Israel’s idolatry. In addition to the fact that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> is spelled differently, the connection between the concept of demon and God as all-powerful is difficult to establish. More acceptable is the suggestion that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is a composite term of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sha<\/span> (“the one who”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dai<\/span> (“is sufficient”). The later Greek versions have adopted this meaning. The most preferred explanation is that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> (“to overpower, to deal violently, or to devastate”). A clear connection between <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is said to be found in Isaiah 13:6 and Joel 1:15. God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is presented as the all-powerful One, totally self-sufficient, absolute ruler, and the One who can and does make final disposition. The Septuagint has adapted this meaning; it translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span><em>,<\/em> the “All-Ruler” or “Sovereign One.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> is used to refer to God as the everlasting or eternal One, a clear instance where the name of God and an attribute of God are combined. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> has a wide range of uses. It is usually defined in lexicons as meaning “long duration, antiquity, and indefinite futurity.” It is used to speak of God’s existence, of God’s covenant and promises, and of the Messiah’s reign. Speaking to God, the psalmist said, “You are from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting) to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting)” (Ps 90:2), and the prophet Isaiah spoke of God as the everlasting Creator (Is 40:28) and as everlasting strength (26:4), and Jeremiah spoke of God as everlasting King (Jer 10:10). God’s everlastingness or eternity speaks of his infinity in relation to time. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Olam<\/span><em>,<\/em> as ascribed to God, should not be thought of as duration prolonged indefinitely backward and forward. Rather, the word speaks to God’s transcending all temporal limits; in addition, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> refers to the quality of God that differs essentially from time. The Scriptures speak of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> in contexts where the believer’s assurance of well-being, security, and hope are presented as prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is a name that speaks of God’s power and might. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gibbor<\/span> alone is used in reference to mighty and heroic men. The two terms together always refer to God, and in some instances <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Haggadol<\/span> (“the greatest”) is added (Dt 10:17; Jer 32:18) to emphasize the greatness and awesome majesty of God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is also used to describe the Messiah in Isaiah 9:6 (cf. Ps 45:4).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Ro’i<\/span> is used once to describe God as the seeing One. Hagar described the Lord this way when she was found in the wilderness (Gn 16:13). Psalm 139:1-2 expresses this concept of God as the all-seeing One from whose eye nothing is hidden (cf. Ps 33:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is a distinctly proper name of God. It is never used to refer to any pagan gods; neither is it used in regard to men. It appears 6,823 times in the OT, occurring first in Genesis 2:4, where it is joined with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used 164 times in Genesis, and it appears 1,800 times in Exodus through Joshua. It never appears in a declined form in the Hebrew language, and it never occurs in the plural form or with suffixes. It is abbreviated as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahu<\/span> (cf. Ex 15:2; Ps 68:4; Is 12:2; etc.).<\/p>\n<p>The exact meaning of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is difficult to determine. Some have sought the root in the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> (“to be”) or in an ancient form of that same verb, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hawah<\/span><em>.<\/em> There is no agreement as to whether the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form of the verb should be considered as the root. Those who opt for the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form read <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> to mean “cause to be”; thus Exodus 3:14 would read, “I will cause to be what has come to be.” Others look to the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> form and then translate the name as “I Am” or “I Shall Be.” Still others are inclined to disassociate the name from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> and regard it as an original and independent term, expressing the uniqueness of Israel’s gracious God.<\/p>\n\n<p>Translators of the OT have not agreed upon the correct translation of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> Since it is translated into the Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “Lord,” many have rendered <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “<span>Lord<\/span>.” But <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is best rendered “Lord,” appears with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in various instances. The <span>kjv<\/span>, for example, translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “God,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as “Lord.” Some modern translators have chosen to use <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> (see <span>jb<\/span> and <span>njb<\/span>). The name Jehovah, as used in the <span>asv<\/span> (1901), has been judged unacceptable. This name arose due to the Jewish practice of not pronouncing <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> because of Leviticus 24:16, “He that blasphemes the name of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> shall surely be put to death.” This warning against a vain or blasphemous use of the name was taken in an absolute sense, especially after Israel’s deportation (cf. Am 6:10). Hence, when reading the OT the Jews substituted either <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> From this, the practice of adding the vowels of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> to YHWH (JeHoWaH) became established.<\/p>\n<p>The interpretation of Exodus 6:2-3 has caused much debate. “And God said to Moses, ‘I am <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">El Shaddai<\/span><em>,<\/em> but by my name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> I did not make myself known to them.’ ” This passage has been understood to mean that the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> was not known or used prior to the time of Moses. But that is not what the passage states; rather, it speaks of the patriarchs not knowing God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> They knew him as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> in actual revelatory historical deeds. They had not come to know God according to his unique character, that is, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> In other words, God had always been <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> he is saying to Moses that the descendants of the patriarchs would come to know the full, rich meaning of the name by the way God dealt with them.<\/p>\n<p>This name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> reveals God’s nature in the highest and fullest sense possible. It includes, or presupposes, the meaning of the other names. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> particularly stresses the absolute faithfulness of God. God had promised the patriarchs that he would be their God, that he would be with them and deliver and bless them, keep them, and give them a land as a place of service and inheritance. Moses is told by God that Israel is about to behold and experience the unchangeableness of God as he steadfastly and wondrously remembers his word and executes it to the fullest degree. God would prove to be a faithful, redeeming, upholding, restoring God. In working out this redemption, God would demonstrate that he is all that his name implies: merciful, gracious, patient, full of loving-kindness, truthful, faithful, forgiving, just, and righteous (Ex 34:5-6). Truly, Jacob had received an insight into the meaning of the name when he exclaimed, “I wait for thy salvation, O <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>” (Gn 49:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, is the name par excellence of Israel’s God. As <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> he is a faithful covenant God who, having given his word of love and life, keeps that word by bestowing love and life abundantly on his own.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the richness of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> it can be understood why there were stringent rules regarding its proper use (Lv 24:11, 16). It also explains why thankful, rejoicing, worshiping Israelites used the abbreviated form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in song when they sang Hallelujah: “Praise Yah” (Pss 104:35; 106:1; 149:1; 150:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used in a number of phrases that are considered names of or ascriptions of God. The most common of these compound names is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> (“hosts”). The word “hosts” is used frequently in the Pentateuch to refer to the armies of Israel (cf. Nm 10:14-28). This is because the word is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saba<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to wage” war. It also means “to serve” in some contexts; for example, Numbers 8:24 clearly has reference to the service performed in the tabernacle. The noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> first occurs in Genesis 2:1, where it refers to the many components of the earth and heaven. Some would limit the reference in these contexts to the stars. Still others would suggest that the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> refers to the angels, appealing to Psalm 33:6 for confirmation.<\/p>\n<p>The compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> first appears in 1 Samuel 1:3. In view of the frequent use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> in 1—2 Samuel to refer to armies (1 Sm 12:9; 14:50; 17:55; 2 Sm 2:8; 8:16; 10:16), it is thought that the compound name refers to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as the God of armies, that is, God has his armies to serve him. These are considered to be armies of angels who are ministering servants to God. It has been correctly pointed out that the compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> is used most frequently by the prophets (Jeremiah, 88 times; Zechariah, 55 times; Malachi, 25 times; Haggai, 14 times) at times when God’s people had either suffered defeat at the hands of enemy armies or were threatened by defeat. Therefore, the compound name was used to remind them that their covenant God had great hosts to fight and work for him on behalf of his people. Thus, though Israel’s armies failed, their covenant God was sufficient for every possible circumstance. And it was to this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> that Israel’s commanders were to give allegiance (Jos 5:14-15), and in whose name Israel was blessed (2 Sm 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>Several other compound names occur infrequently:<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Nissi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my banner”) is the name that Moses called on when he built an altar celebrating Israel’s God-given victory over the Amalekites (Ex 17:15). Isaiah uses the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span> when speaking of the coming Messiah who is to be the conqueror (Is 11:10).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rapha<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">rapha’<\/span><em>,<\/em> “healer”) appears in Exodus 15:26, when Israel is assured that God, their healer, will prevent the diseases of Egypt from affecting Israel. Although the name is only used once, God was often called upon and praised as the healing One (e.g., Ps 103:3; Is 30:26; Jer 6:14).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rohi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ro‘i<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my shepherd”) appears in Psalm 23:1. The concept of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as shepherd is explicated in Ezekiel 34. “I myself will be the Shepherd of my sheep” (v 15). Jesus demonstrated this concept’s full meaning when as a shepherd he gave his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Jireh<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yir’eh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to see ahead or to provide”) appears in Genesis 22:14. Abraham gave this name to the place where God provided a substitute for his son Isaac, whom Abraham was to offer as a sacrifice to God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Shalom<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> “peace”) is the name Gideon gave to the altar he built when the angel of the Lord came to give him orders to fight the Midianites (Jgs 6:24).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> appears with a few forms of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tsadaq<\/span><em>,<\/em> “righteousness.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is spoken of as our righteousness in Jeremiah 23:6; the thought evidently is that David’s Righteous Branch (the Messiah) will attribute God’s righteousness to those who are incorporated in the new covenant. This concept is expressed in the Pentateuch a number of times when it is said that God has provided a way for living righteously; that is, God provides a way of sanctification (cf. Lv 20:8; 22:9).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as a name for God appears about 360 times in the OT, though it is not uniformly used. It is first found in Genesis 15:2 and 8, when Abram requests more definite information concerning a son and the Promised Land. It appears only 14 times after that in the Pentateuch. It appears repeatedly in the Psalms (over 50 times), and certain of the prophets use it frequently (Isaiah, 47 times; Jeremiah, 29 times; Ezekiel, over 150 times; and Amos, 27 times).<\/p>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adan<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “master, ruler, owner, lord,” is thought to be the root of the noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adon<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is frequently used of men. For example, in Genesis and 1—2 Samuel the term is used often for men who own slaves or are in positions of authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> is correctly described as the name of personal communication between the believer and God. In such communication the worshiper acknowledged God’s intense majesty and greatness and also the sense of belonging to this God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> coming from human lips, expressed honor for God and humble submission on the part of the believing person. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> thus, is the name that expresses faith, assurance, security, ready service, and thanksgiving (Pss 16:2; 57:9-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Name Combinations<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT the names of God appear in various combinations. For example <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh-’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-’Adonai<\/span> are very common. These combinations were an effort to express the fullness of God’s being and character as these had been revealed. Names of God in combination with “Israel” occur also as, for example, with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>-God-Israel (Jgs 5:3; Is 17:6). God is also invoked in relation to Israel without the mention of one of his names—for example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Qedosh Yisrael<\/span> (“Holy One of Israel,” Is 43:14) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abir Yisrael<\/span> (“Mighty One of Israel,” Gn 49:24; Ps 132:2; Is 49:26). By means of these phrases, the covenantal relationship between God and his people was expressed and God’s unchanging character was positively acknowledged.<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Personal Names<\/h5>\n<p>The personal names of God are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and variations of these.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abh<\/span> (“father”) appears more frequently in Genesis than in any other book, and in the Pentateuch more than in any other division of the OT. But it is not used there of God but rather of one who has generated children (i.e., the male parent), the progenitor—head, chief, and ruler of the family group or clan. It is used often in the sense of the responsible one through whom God has spoken, with whom God has dealt, and through whom he has given a rich heritage to the children and descendants of the patriarchs.<\/p>\n<p>In the poetical books, God is referred to as Father but is not directly named as such. Job is asked, “Has the rain a father?” (Jb 38:28). The reference is to God as the maker, source, and controller of rain. In Psalm 68:5 God in his holy dwelling place is the “Father of the fatherless”; the parallel phrase, “protector of widows,” indicates the sense. Psalm 89:26 says that David will cry to God, “Thou art my Father,” and the parallels use the terms “God” and “Rock of my salvation.” The idea here is of God as Creator and Savior who raised up, delivered, and protected David. In Psalm 103:13, “Father” is used analogously, “As a father pities his children.”<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah uses the term “Father” in relation to God four times. Three times it refers to the One who has made, saved, formed, kept, and directed Israel (Is 63:16; 64:8). Isaiah says the promised child is to be named Everlasting Father (9:6). Used in this sense, the term establishes the Son’s equality with the Father in stature, function, ability, and responsibility. Jeremiah also refers to God as Father in Jeremiah 3:4, 19, meaning the origin, keeper, and friend of his people Israel. Malachi 1:6 and 2:10 speak of God as the parent who deserves honor from his children and as the origin and ruler of all people.<\/p>\n<p>The term “son” is one of the most-used terms in the OT; it commonly occurs in the sense of offspring and descendant. It also appears in the sense of follower or successor. There are a few indirect references to the second person of the Trinity.<\/p>\n<p>The messianic Psalm 2 has such a reference: “You are my son” (v 7). It is stated in the context of the king speaking to one who rules and is to rule with and under the sovereign. The immediate reference may be to the theocratic king; however, the reference is revealed in the NT to be the second person of the Trinity (Acts 13:33). Thus, the term “son” is applied to the promised Messiah who is set forth as the divine sovereign ruler and judge of the nations. The Son is perceived to be equal with the Father in deity and function. Not all biblical scholars accept this interpretation, but support is found in such NT passages as Hebrews 1:8 which quotes Psalm 45:6. As stated above, Isaiah speaks of the son to be given (Is 9:6), the One born of the virgin (7:14), who is Immanuel, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.<\/p>\n<p>The name “Holy Spirit” occurs only a few times in the OT. The Spirit is referred to frequently by terms and phrases such as “the Spirit of God” (Gn 1:2), “the Spirit of the Lord God” (Is 61:1), “the Spirit of the Lord” (Ez 37:1), “the Spirit” (Nm 11:17; 27:18), “my Spirit” (Gn 6:3), and “your Spirit” (Ps 51:11). Though the character of the Spirit is not developed as clearly in the OT as in the NT, it can be safely stated that the relationship posited between God and the Spirit is such that there is no doubt that the OT teaches the deity of the Spirit. The character and function of the Spirit is referred to especially in relation to the work of creation (Gn 1:2; Ps 33:6; etc.) and the equipping of servants for the service of God—for example, craftsmanship (Ex 35:31), leadership (Nm 11:17; 27:18), and prophecy (1 Sm 10:6; 2 Sm 23:2; 2 Chr 15:1; Ez 11:5).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheNewTestament\">The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Proper Names of God<\/h5>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> is the NT equivalent of the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span>and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>;<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> appears in the NT as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hupsistos<\/span><em>,<\/em> the Highest (Mk 5:7; Lk 1:32, 76). <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘El Shaddai<\/span>) appears with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> (2 Cor 6:18; Rv 16:7). This name was used not only to express God’s transcendency, power, sovereignty, and lordship, but also to express that God is one who has a close relationship with his people. This fact is established by the very frequent use of personal pronouns with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span><em>.<\/em> The name <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> appears over 1,000 times in the NT.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> “Lord,” is used to express the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Adonai<\/span> in the Septuagint, and the NT follows it. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> means “power,” so the meaning is not the same as with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> yet the NT does give <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> the full weight of meaning that the OT gave to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> especially when used of Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 2:36; Phil 2:9-11; etc.)<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Despotes<\/span> is used five times of God or Jesus in the NT (Lk 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Pt 2:11; Jude 1:4; Rv 6:10). It expresses the idea of authority. The idea of brutality conveyed by the modern concept “despot” is absent from the NT usage even when applied to men, where its central thought is ownership (2 Tm 2:21).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Names of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the baptismal formula, which is part of the Great Commission (Mt 28:19-20), the three personal names of God appear: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These names carry the OT meaning, but since the relationship of the three Persons is explicated, the NT meaning of the names is enriched.<\/p>\n<p>“Jesus” is the personal name of the Son, the second person of the triune Godhead. It means “savior” (Mt 1:21). The root of this name “to save” gave rise to names such as Joshua, Hoshea, and Hosea. The basic meaning of the OT root is “to bring into a safe, wide-open place.” Joshua, bringing Israel into Canaan, personally did what his name meant. The NT explanation (“save from sin”) is not contrary to the OT meaning. To be saved from sin is to be restored to fellowship with God and to enter into the paradise of the heavenly kingdom.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; Holy Spirit; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah; Names, Significance of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOD, Names of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBiblicalIdeaofName\">The Biblical Idea of Name<\/p>\n<p>In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">onoma<\/span><em>)<\/em> is derived from a verb that means “to know.” A name, therefore, indicates that by which a person or object is to be known. But the idea of name is not to be taken in the sense of a label or an arbitrary means of identifying or specifying a person, place, or object. “Name” in biblical usage correctly describes the person, place, or object and indicates the essential character of that to which the name is given. Adam named the animals according to their nature (Gn 2:19-20); Noah means “one who brings relief and comfort” (5:29); Jesus means “savior” (Mt 1:21). When a person was given a new position or a radical change took place in his life, a new name was given to indicate that new aspect—for example, Abraham (“father of many,” Gn 17:5), and Israel (“one who strives with God” or “God strives,” 32:28). The name of a person or people expressed what the person or people thought the proper description or statement of character was.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the names of God, there are considerable differences, and these are most clearly seen when biblical scholars and theologians confront the question of whether the names of God are ascriptions given by God concerning himself or they are ascriptions given to God by people who observed his acts and reflected on his character as discerned through a study of divine deeds. Here are some examples of various kinds of divine names:<\/p>\n<p>1. Proper names: El, Yahweh, Adonai, Theos (God), Kurios (Lord).<\/p>\n<li>2. Personal names: Father, Abba, Son, Jesus, Holy Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>3. Titles: Creator, Messiah\/Christ, Paraclete\/Comforter.<\/li>\n<li>4. Essential names: Light, Love, Spirit.<\/li>\n<li>5. Descriptive names: Rock, Ba’al, Master, Rabboni, Shepherd.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheOldTestament\">The Names of God in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<h5>El and Related Names<\/h5>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is found over 200 times in the Hebrew Bible. It is best translated as “God.” The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> has a number of possible meanings. The root is thought by some to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’ul<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to be first” or “to be strong.” Others suggest the root is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to precede” and suggests “leader” or “commander.” It can also mean “to be afraid.” Thus God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> as the strong one, is to be feared. Still others suggest the preposition <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’el<\/span> (“to, toward”) as the root; the idea then is of “one giving self to others” or of “one to whom others go for help.” Some scholars suggest that the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alim<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bind,” should be considered as a root also—that is, “the strong one binds and holds firm control.” Common to these four suggested root meanings is the idea of strength, power, and of supreme excellence and greatness.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> in the OT is used particularly in the earlier books, where it describes God’s exercising dynamic power as distinguished from authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> speaks of God as the great doer and producer. He is the One who exercises such power that whatever is made, done, kept, or destroyed is his doing (cf. Ex 15). <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span> is also used to express the idea that God is not to be identified as part of creation but as the One who is above, behind, and beyond creation (Ps 19:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is also commonly used as the name of God, occurring over 2,500 times in the OT. There are differences of opinion concerning the exact origin and meaning of this plural name. Some have suggested that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is the plural form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>,<\/em> but it seems more likely that it is a plural of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which appears in the poetical writings. Some critical writers have suggested that this plural form is borrowed from pagan polytheistic sources, but no such plural form is found among pagans as the name of a deity. Others have suggested that the plural form is used to indicate the triune nature of God, and support for this has been seen in the use of a singular verb with this plural noun. The biblical doctrine of the Trinity, as it is developed throughout the Scriptures, does not appear to be based on the use of this plural form of God’s name, even though the two positions are not contradictory.<\/p>\n<p>The plural form, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>,<\/em> is best understood as expressing intensity. God makes himself known by this name as the Lord of intense and extensive glory and richness as he exercises his preeminence and power in the created cosmos. Hence, when the Scripture speaks of creation, it states, “In the beginning <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> created the heavens and the earth” (Gn 1:1). This name is repeated 35 times in Genesis 1 and 2 in connection with God’s power as revealed in Creation. In the book of Deuteronomy the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> is used repeatedly to stress the majestic power of God that was shown in Israel’s release from bondage in Egypt, preservation in the wilderness, and preparation for entrance into the Promised Land. In this context, God <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also recognized as the Lawgiver who will powerfully execute judgment on covenant breakers. The psalmists also used this named repeatedly as they acknowledged and praised God the majestic ruler who had demonstrated his omnipotence in many dimensions of life (see Ps 68, in which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> appears 26 times.)<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to the use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> when God spoke to Abraham and said he would be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> to the patriarch and his seed; that is, God would be in a covenant relationship to them (Gn 17:1-8). Included in this relationship is the idea that God is ever ready to use his power on behalf of those who are in covenant with him. Thus, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Elohim<\/span> also expresses the concept of God’s faithfulness in regard to the covenant and the promises and blessings involved in it.<\/p>\n<p>The name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> occurs mainly in the poetical writings, no fewer than 41 times in Job. Isaiah used it to express the incomparable character of God (Is 44:8). In like manner David asked, “Who is God [<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span>], but the <span>Lord<\/span>?” (2 Sm 22:32). Moses was the first to use the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Eloah<\/span> in his song (Dt 32:15-17), referring to Israel’s God in the context of the “no-gods,” which had been chosen in place of the Rock of salvation and the incomparable One. This name was probably used to stress the fact that God is the only true and living One, the One to be adored and worshiped; he is to be revered with a holy fear.<\/p>\n<p>Another closely related name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span><em>,<\/em> found in Ezra and Daniel. Some think <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is a Chaldee or Aramaic form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Eloah<\/span><em>.<\/em> Its root is said to be <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to fear” or “to be perplexed.” God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elah<\/span> is the God to be feared and worshiped accordingly. In view of this meaning, it can be understood why, in the time of Israel’s exile and immediately after their return, this name was commonly used.<\/p>\n<p>Three other names of God include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span><em>:<\/em><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Elyon<\/span> is the name used to designate the God of Melchizedek (Gn 14:18-22) as God Most High. In Psalms 57:2 and 78:56 the Hebrew reads <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim ‘Elyon<\/span><em>.<\/em> It is believed that the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘alah<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “go up, be elevated, to be exalted.” There are a number of instances where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> is used alone, but the context indicates that it is then used as a synonym for God (e.g., Nm 24:16; Ps 83:18; Is 14:14). The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘elyon<\/span> is used quite frequently as an adjective; it is then translated as “high, highest, upper, uppermost.” The basic ascription given to God when this name is employed is to One who is above all things as the maker, possessor, and ruler. He is incomparable in every way; he is subject to no one and no thing; he is the Exalted One.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is used in the longer form seven times in the Scriptures (Gn 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3; Ex 6:3; Ez 10:5). In the shorter form <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>),<\/em> it appears more frequently: in Job 30 times; in Psalms 19:1 and 68:14; once in Ruth (1:21), Isaiah (13:6), Ezekiel (1:24), and Joel (1:15). In these passages the combined ideas of God as the all-powerful, all-sufficient, transcendent, sovereign ruler and disposer are present. This meaning is generally accepted, but there are differences as to the exact meaning of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span><em>.<\/em> Some have begun with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> as the first concept to be considered; its meaning is “breast, pap, or teat,” and it is considered a “precious metaphor” of the God who nourishes, supplies, and satisfies. The root of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shad<\/span> <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadah<\/span><em>),<\/em> in Semitic usage, is to moisten. This meaning is not the preferred one in the context of which <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> appears; nor is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> (demon), which some scholars have sought to use because it appears in Deuteronomy 32:17 and Psalm 106:37 speaking of Israel’s idolatry. In addition to the fact that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shed<\/span> is spelled differently, the connection between the concept of demon and God as all-powerful is difficult to establish. More acceptable is the suggestion that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is a composite term of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sha<\/span> (“the one who”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dai<\/span> (“is sufficient”). The later Greek versions have adopted this meaning. The most preferred explanation is that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> (“to overpower, to deal violently, or to devastate”). A clear connection between <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shadad<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shaddai<\/span> is said to be found in Isaiah 13:6 and Joel 1:15. God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> is presented as the all-powerful One, totally self-sufficient, absolute ruler, and the One who can and does make final disposition. The Septuagint has adapted this meaning; it translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span><em>,<\/em> the “All-Ruler” or “Sovereign One.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> is used to refer to God as the everlasting or eternal One, a clear instance where the name of God and an attribute of God are combined. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> has a wide range of uses. It is usually defined in lexicons as meaning “long duration, antiquity, and indefinite futurity.” It is used to speak of God’s existence, of God’s covenant and promises, and of the Messiah’s reign. Speaking to God, the psalmist said, “You are from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting) to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> (everlasting)” (Ps 90:2), and the prophet Isaiah spoke of God as the everlasting Creator (Is 40:28) and as everlasting strength (26:4), and Jeremiah spoke of God as everlasting King (Jer 10:10). God’s everlastingness or eternity speaks of his infinity in relation to time. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Olam<\/span><em>,<\/em> as ascribed to God, should not be thought of as duration prolonged indefinitely backward and forward. Rather, the word speaks to God’s transcending all temporal limits; in addition, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘olam<\/span> refers to the quality of God that differs essentially from time. The Scriptures speak of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El ‘Olam<\/span> in contexts where the believer’s assurance of well-being, security, and hope are presented as prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is a name that speaks of God’s power and might. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gibbor<\/span> alone is used in reference to mighty and heroic men. The two terms together always refer to God, and in some instances <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Haggadol<\/span> (“the greatest”) is added (Dt 10:17; Jer 32:18) to emphasize the greatness and awesome majesty of God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Gibbor<\/span> is also used to describe the Messiah in Isaiah 9:6 (cf. Ps 45:4).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Ro’i<\/span> is used once to describe God as the seeing One. Hagar described the Lord this way when she was found in the wilderness (Gn 16:13). Psalm 139:1-2 expresses this concept of God as the all-seeing One from whose eye nothing is hidden (cf. Ps 33:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is a distinctly proper name of God. It is never used to refer to any pagan gods; neither is it used in regard to men. It appears 6,823 times in the OT, occurring first in Genesis 2:4, where it is joined with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used 164 times in Genesis, and it appears 1,800 times in Exodus through Joshua. It never appears in a declined form in the Hebrew language, and it never occurs in the plural form or with suffixes. It is abbreviated as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahu<\/span> (cf. Ex 15:2; Ps 68:4; Is 12:2; etc.).<\/p>\n<p>The exact meaning of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is difficult to determine. Some have sought the root in the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> (“to be”) or in an ancient form of that same verb, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hawah<\/span><em>.<\/em> There is no agreement as to whether the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form of the verb should be considered as the root. Those who opt for the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hiphil<\/span> form read <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> to mean “cause to be”; thus Exodus 3:14 would read, “I will cause to be what has come to be.” Others look to the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">qal<\/span> form and then translate the name as “I Am” or “I Shall Be.” Still others are inclined to disassociate the name from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hayah<\/span> and regard it as an original and independent term, expressing the uniqueness of Israel’s gracious God.<\/p>\n\n<p>Translators of the OT have not agreed upon the correct translation of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> Since it is translated into the Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “Lord,” many have rendered <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “<span>Lord<\/span>.” But <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is best rendered “Lord,” appears with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in various instances. The <span>kjv<\/span>, for example, translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as “God,” and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as “Lord.” Some modern translators have chosen to use <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> (see <span>jb<\/span> and <span>njb<\/span>). The name Jehovah, as used in the <span>asv<\/span> (1901), has been judged unacceptable. This name arose due to the Jewish practice of not pronouncing <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> because of Leviticus 24:16, “He that blasphemes the name of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> shall surely be put to death.” This warning against a vain or blasphemous use of the name was taken in an absolute sense, especially after Israel’s deportation (cf. Am 6:10). Hence, when reading the OT the Jews substituted either <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span> or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> From this, the practice of adding the vowels of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> to YHWH (JeHoWaH) became established.<\/p>\n<p>The interpretation of Exodus 6:2-3 has caused much debate. “And God said to Moses, ‘I am <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">El Shaddai<\/span><em>,<\/em> but by my name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> I did not make myself known to them.’ ” This passage has been understood to mean that the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> was not known or used prior to the time of Moses. But that is not what the passage states; rather, it speaks of the patriarchs not knowing God as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> They knew him as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El Shaddai<\/span> in actual revelatory historical deeds. They had not come to know God according to his unique character, that is, as <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>.<\/em> In other words, God had always been <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> he is saying to Moses that the descendants of the patriarchs would come to know the full, rich meaning of the name by the way God dealt with them.<\/p>\n<p>This name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> reveals God’s nature in the highest and fullest sense possible. It includes, or presupposes, the meaning of the other names. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> particularly stresses the absolute faithfulness of God. God had promised the patriarchs that he would be their God, that he would be with them and deliver and bless them, keep them, and give them a land as a place of service and inheritance. Moses is told by God that Israel is about to behold and experience the unchangeableness of God as he steadfastly and wondrously remembers his word and executes it to the fullest degree. God would prove to be a faithful, redeeming, upholding, restoring God. In working out this redemption, God would demonstrate that he is all that his name implies: merciful, gracious, patient, full of loving-kindness, truthful, faithful, forgiving, just, and righteous (Ex 34:5-6). Truly, Jacob had received an insight into the meaning of the name when he exclaimed, “I wait for thy salvation, O <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>” (Gn 49:18).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, is the name par excellence of Israel’s God. As <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> he is a faithful covenant God who, having given his word of love and life, keeps that word by bestowing love and life abundantly on his own.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the richness of the name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> it can be understood why there were stringent rules regarding its proper use (Lv 24:11, 16). It also explains why thankful, rejoicing, worshiping Israelites used the abbreviated form of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> in song when they sang Hallelujah: “Praise Yah” (Pss 104:35; 106:1; 149:1; 150:1).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is used in a number of phrases that are considered names of or ascriptions of God. The most common of these compound names is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> (“hosts”). The word “hosts” is used frequently in the Pentateuch to refer to the armies of Israel (cf. Nm 10:14-28). This is because the word is derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saba<\/span><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to wage” war. It also means “to serve” in some contexts; for example, Numbers 8:24 clearly has reference to the service performed in the tabernacle. The noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> first occurs in Genesis 2:1, where it refers to the many components of the earth and heaven. Some would limit the reference in these contexts to the stars. Still others would suggest that the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> refers to the angels, appealing to Psalm 33:6 for confirmation.<\/p>\n<p>The compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> first appears in 1 Samuel 1:3. In view of the frequent use of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tseba’oth<\/span> in 1—2 Samuel to refer to armies (1 Sm 12:9; 14:50; 17:55; 2 Sm 2:8; 8:16; 10:16), it is thought that the compound name refers to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as the God of armies, that is, God has his armies to serve him. These are considered to be armies of angels who are ministering servants to God. It has been correctly pointed out that the compound name <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> is used most frequently by the prophets (Jeremiah, 88 times; Zechariah, 55 times; Malachi, 25 times; Haggai, 14 times) at times when God’s people had either suffered defeat at the hands of enemy armies or were threatened by defeat. Therefore, the compound name was used to remind them that their covenant God had great hosts to fight and work for him on behalf of his people. Thus, though Israel’s armies failed, their covenant God was sufficient for every possible circumstance. And it was to this <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh Tseba’oth<\/span> that Israel’s commanders were to give allegiance (Jos 5:14-15), and in whose name Israel was blessed (2 Sm 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>Several other compound names occur infrequently:<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Nissi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my banner”) is the name that Moses called on when he built an altar celebrating Israel’s God-given victory over the Amalekites (Ex 17:15). Isaiah uses the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nissi<\/span> when speaking of the coming Messiah who is to be the conqueror (Is 11:10).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rapha<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">rapha’<\/span><em>,<\/em> “healer”) appears in Exodus 15:26, when Israel is assured that God, their healer, will prevent the diseases of Egypt from affecting Israel. Although the name is only used once, God was often called upon and praised as the healing One (e.g., Ps 103:3; Is 30:26; Jer 6:14).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Rohi<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ro‘i<\/span><em>,<\/em> “my shepherd”) appears in Psalm 23:1. The concept of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> as shepherd is explicated in Ezekiel 34. “I myself will be the Shepherd of my sheep” (v 15). Jesus demonstrated this concept’s full meaning when as a shepherd he gave his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Jireh<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yir’eh<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to see ahead or to provide”) appears in Genesis 22:14. Abraham gave this name to the place where God provided a substitute for his son Isaac, whom Abraham was to offer as a sacrifice to God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh-Shalom<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span><em>,<\/em> “peace”) is the name Gideon gave to the altar he built when the angel of the Lord came to give him orders to fight the Midianites (Jgs 6:24).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> appears with a few forms of the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">tsadaq<\/span><em>,<\/em> “righteousness.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> is spoken of as our righteousness in Jeremiah 23:6; the thought evidently is that David’s Righteous Branch (the Messiah) will attribute God’s righteousness to those who are incorporated in the new covenant. This concept is expressed in the Pentateuch a number of times when it is said that God has provided a way for living righteously; that is, God provides a way of sanctification (cf. Lv 20:8; 22:9).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> as a name for God appears about 360 times in the OT, though it is not uniformly used. It is first found in Genesis 15:2 and 8, when Abram requests more definite information concerning a son and the Promised Land. It appears only 14 times after that in the Pentateuch. It appears repeatedly in the Psalms (over 50 times), and certain of the prophets use it frequently (Isaiah, 47 times; Jeremiah, 29 times; Ezekiel, over 150 times; and Amos, 27 times).<\/p>\n<p>The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adan<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “master, ruler, owner, lord,” is thought to be the root of the noun <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’adon<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is frequently used of men. For example, in Genesis and 1—2 Samuel the term is used often for men who own slaves or are in positions of authority. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span> is correctly described as the name of personal communication between the believer and God. In such communication the worshiper acknowledged God’s intense majesty and greatness and also the sense of belonging to this God. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> coming from human lips, expressed honor for God and humble submission on the part of the believing person. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> thus, is the name that expresses faith, assurance, security, ready service, and thanksgiving (Pss 16:2; 57:9-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Name Combinations<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT the names of God appear in various combinations. For example <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-Yahweh-’Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim-’Adonai<\/span> are very common. These combinations were an effort to express the fullness of God’s being and character as these had been revealed. Names of God in combination with “Israel” occur also as, for example, with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span>-God-Israel (Jgs 5:3; Is 17:6). God is also invoked in relation to Israel without the mention of one of his names—for example, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Qedosh Yisrael<\/span> (“Holy One of Israel,” Is 43:14) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abir Yisrael<\/span> (“Mighty One of Israel,” Gn 49:24; Ps 132:2; Is 49:26). By means of these phrases, the covenantal relationship between God and his people was expressed and God’s unchanging character was positively acknowledged.<\/p>\n<h5>Old Testament Personal Names<\/h5>\n<p>The personal names of God are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and variations of these.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Abh<\/span> (“father”) appears more frequently in Genesis than in any other book, and in the Pentateuch more than in any other division of the OT. But it is not used there of God but rather of one who has generated children (i.e., the male parent), the progenitor—head, chief, and ruler of the family group or clan. It is used often in the sense of the responsible one through whom God has spoken, with whom God has dealt, and through whom he has given a rich heritage to the children and descendants of the patriarchs.<\/p>\n<p>In the poetical books, God is referred to as Father but is not directly named as such. Job is asked, “Has the rain a father?” (Jb 38:28). The reference is to God as the maker, source, and controller of rain. In Psalm 68:5 God in his holy dwelling place is the “Father of the fatherless”; the parallel phrase, “protector of widows,” indicates the sense. Psalm 89:26 says that David will cry to God, “Thou art my Father,” and the parallels use the terms “God” and “Rock of my salvation.” The idea here is of God as Creator and Savior who raised up, delivered, and protected David. In Psalm 103:13, “Father” is used analogously, “As a father pities his children.”<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah uses the term “Father” in relation to God four times. Three times it refers to the One who has made, saved, formed, kept, and directed Israel (Is 63:16; 64:8). Isaiah says the promised child is to be named Everlasting Father (9:6). Used in this sense, the term establishes the Son’s equality with the Father in stature, function, ability, and responsibility. Jeremiah also refers to God as Father in Jeremiah 3:4, 19, meaning the origin, keeper, and friend of his people Israel. Malachi 1:6 and 2:10 speak of God as the parent who deserves honor from his children and as the origin and ruler of all people.<\/p>\n<p>The term “son” is one of the most-used terms in the OT; it commonly occurs in the sense of offspring and descendant. It also appears in the sense of follower or successor. There are a few indirect references to the second person of the Trinity.<\/p>\n<p>The messianic Psalm 2 has such a reference: “You are my son” (v 7). It is stated in the context of the king speaking to one who rules and is to rule with and under the sovereign. The immediate reference may be to the theocratic king; however, the reference is revealed in the NT to be the second person of the Trinity (Acts 13:33). Thus, the term “son” is applied to the promised Messiah who is set forth as the divine sovereign ruler and judge of the nations. The Son is perceived to be equal with the Father in deity and function. Not all biblical scholars accept this interpretation, but support is found in such NT passages as Hebrews 1:8 which quotes Psalm 45:6. As stated above, Isaiah speaks of the son to be given (Is 9:6), the One born of the virgin (7:14), who is Immanuel, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.<\/p>\n<p>The name “Holy Spirit” occurs only a few times in the OT. The Spirit is referred to frequently by terms and phrases such as “the Spirit of God” (Gn 1:2), “the Spirit of the Lord God” (Is 61:1), “the Spirit of the Lord” (Ez 37:1), “the Spirit” (Nm 11:17; 27:18), “my Spirit” (Gn 6:3), and “your Spirit” (Ps 51:11). Though the character of the Spirit is not developed as clearly in the OT as in the NT, it can be safely stated that the relationship posited between God and the Spirit is such that there is no doubt that the OT teaches the deity of the Spirit. The character and function of the Spirit is referred to especially in relation to the work of creation (Gn 1:2; Ps 33:6; etc.) and the equipping of servants for the service of God—for example, craftsmanship (Ex 35:31), leadership (Nm 11:17; 27:18), and prophecy (1 Sm 10:6; 2 Sm 23:2; 2 Chr 15:1; Ez 11:5).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNamesofGodintheNewTestament\">The Names of God in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>Proper Names of God<\/h5>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> is the NT equivalent of the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’El<\/span>and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’Elohim<\/span><em>;<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Elyon<\/span> appears in the NT as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Hupsistos<\/span><em>,<\/em> the Highest (Mk 5:7; Lk 1:32, 76). <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Pantokrator<\/span> (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘El Shaddai<\/span>) appears with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> (2 Cor 6:18; Rv 16:7). This name was used not only to express God’s transcendency, power, sovereignty, and lordship, but also to express that God is one who has a close relationship with his people. This fact is established by the very frequent use of personal pronouns with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span><em>.<\/em> The name <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Theos<\/span> appears over 1,000 times in the NT.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> “Lord,” is used to express the OT names <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘Adonai<\/span> in the Septuagint, and the NT follows it. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> means “power,” so the meaning is not the same as with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>;<\/em> yet the NT does give <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Kurios<\/span> the full weight of meaning that the OT gave to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yahweh<\/span><em>,<\/em> especially when used of Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 2:36; Phil 2:9-11; etc.)<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Despotes<\/span> is used five times of God or Jesus in the NT (Lk 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Pt 2:11; Jude 1:4; Rv 6:10). It expresses the idea of authority. The idea of brutality conveyed by the modern concept “despot” is absent from the NT usage even when applied to men, where its central thought is ownership (2 Tm 2:21).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Names of God<\/h5>\n<p>In the baptismal formula, which is part of the Great Commission (Mt 28:19-20), the three personal names of God appear: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These names carry the OT meaning, but since the relationship of the three Persons is explicated, the NT meaning of the names is enriched.<\/p>\n<p>“Jesus” is the personal name of the Son, the second person of the triune Godhead. It means “savior” (Mt 1:21). The root of this name “to save” gave rise to names such as Joshua, Hoshea, and Hosea. The basic meaning of the OT root is “to bring into a safe, wide-open place.” Joshua, bringing Israel into Canaan, personally did what his name meant. The NT explanation (“save from sin”) is not contrary to the OT meaning. To be saved from sin is to be restored to fellowship with God and to enter into the paradise of the heavenly kingdom.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; Holy Spirit; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah; Names, Significance of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOD, Names of God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being. Preview • The Biblical Idea of Name • The Names of God in the Old Testament • The Names of God in the New Testament The Biblical Idea of Name In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies. In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” (onom...","summary_en":"GOD, Names of God’s self-identifications expressing various aspects of his being. Preview • The Biblical Idea of Name • The Names of God in the Old Testament • The Names of God in the New Testament The Biblical Idea of Name In the Scriptures the name and person of God are inseparably related. This is in keeping with the biblical conception of what a name signifies. In the Hebrew language, the term for “name” most probably meant “sign” or “distinctive mark.” In the Greek language, “name” (onom...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22431,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lamech","title_en":"Lamech","content_ro":"<h3>LAMECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsmen, musicians, and metalworkers. His song of vengeance (vv 23-24) is an example of early Hebrew poetry. In the song Lamech declares that he has killed a man for wounding him and compares the act to his forebear Cain’s slaying of Abel (cf. vv 8-12). He asserts that “if anyone who kills Cain is to be punished seven times, anyone who takes revenge against me will be punished seventy-seven times!” Lamech’s song indicates that, as civilization became more complex, pride and the propensity for violence increased. Jesus’ word about forgiving “seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) stands in sharp contrast to Lamech’s example.<\/li>\n<li>2. Methuselah’s son, and the father of Noah (Gn 5:25-31; 1 Chr 1:3). When Noah was born, Lamech expressed his hope that the child would bring relief to humanity from the curse placed upon Adam (Gn 5:29; cf. 3:17). His life span—777 years—is one of the longest in the listing of those who lived before the Flood. Fanciful conversations in old age between Lamech and his father, Methuselah, are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Lamech is listed as an ancestor of Jesus in the genealogy recorded in Luke 3:36.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsmen, musicians, and metalworkers. His song of vengeance (vv 23-24) is an example of early Hebrew poetry. In the song Lamech declares that he has killed a man for wounding him and compares the act to his forebear Cain’s slaying of Abel (cf. vv 8-12). He asserts that “if anyone who kills Cain is to be punished seven times, anyone who takes revenge against me will be punished seventy-seven times!” Lamech’s song indicates that, as civilization became more complex, pride and the propensity for violence increased. Jesus’ word about forgiving “seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) stands in sharp contrast to Lamech’s example.<\/li>\n<li>2. Methuselah’s son, and the father of Noah (Gn 5:25-31; 1 Chr 1:3). When Noah was born, Lamech expressed his hope that the child would bring relief to humanity from the curse placed upon Adam (Gn 5:29; cf. 3:17). His life span—777 years—is one of the longest in the listing of those who lived before the Flood. Fanciful conversations in old age between Lamech and his father, Methuselah, are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Lamech is listed as an ancestor of Jesus in the genealogy recorded in Luke 3:36.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMECH 1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsme...","summary_en":"LAMECH 1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24462,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marriage Customs Marriage","title_en":"Marriage Customs Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","summary_en":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27623,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Noah","title_en":"Noah","content_ro":"<h3>NOAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the <span>Lord<\/span> has cursed” (v 29, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man righteous in God’s sight and blameless before people (Gn 6:3-9). Following God’s precise instructions, Noah constructed an ark into which went only eight people—Noah and his wife and his three sons and their wives—and all kinds of creatures in pairs. They were thus protected from the ensuing deluge in which all other living things perished (6:14–8:19). When they emerged from the ark, Noah built an altar and sacrificed burnt offerings that pleased God, who promised that the Flood would never be repeated or the sequence of the seasons disrupted, despite man’s sin (8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah had withstood mighty temptations, but, whether through carelessness or old age, he became drunk. Family members reacted differently and were judged accordingly. Shem and Japheth received blessing. Ham received no blessing, but his son Canaan was cursed (9:20-27). Noah was 950 years old when he died, 350 years after the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Noah, Daniel, and Job are specifically cited for “their righteousness” in Ezekiel 14:12-14, 19-20. The Letter to the Hebrews commends Noah, who by faith, holy fear, and rejection of the world became the heir of righteousness (11:7), and 2 Peter 2:5 calls him “a preacher of righteousness.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flood, The; Gilgamesh Epic.<\/p>\n<li>2. Daughter of Zelophehad of Manasseh’s tribe (Nm 26:33). When their father died without a son, she and her four sisters successfully petitioned for a change in the law that would protect their inheritance rights (Nm 27:1-11; cf. Jos 17:3-6). They were, however, restricted to marrying within their own tribe (Nm 36:1-12).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>NOAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the <span>Lord<\/span> has cursed” (v 29, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<p>Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man righteous in God’s sight and blameless before people (Gn 6:3-9). Following God’s precise instructions, Noah constructed an ark into which went only eight people—Noah and his wife and his three sons and their wives—and all kinds of creatures in pairs. They were thus protected from the ensuing deluge in which all other living things perished (6:14–8:19). When they emerged from the ark, Noah built an altar and sacrificed burnt offerings that pleased God, who promised that the Flood would never be repeated or the sequence of the seasons disrupted, despite man’s sin (8:20–9:17).<\/p>\n<p>Noah had withstood mighty temptations, but, whether through carelessness or old age, he became drunk. Family members reacted differently and were judged accordingly. Shem and Japheth received blessing. Ham received no blessing, but his son Canaan was cursed (9:20-27). Noah was 950 years old when he died, 350 years after the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Noah, Daniel, and Job are specifically cited for “their righteousness” in Ezekiel 14:12-14, 19-20. The Letter to the Hebrews commends Noah, who by faith, holy fear, and rejection of the world became the heir of righteousness (11:7), and 2 Peter 2:5 calls him “a preacher of righteousness.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flood, The; Gilgamesh Epic.<\/p>\n<li>2. Daughter of Zelophehad of Manasseh’s tribe (Nm 26:33). When their father died without a son, she and her four sisters successfully petitioned for a change in the law that would protect their inheritance rights (Nm 27:1-11; cf. Jos 17:3-6). They were, however, restricted to marrying within their own tribe (Nm 36:1-12).<\/li>","summary_ro":"NOAH 1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the Lord has cursed” (v 29, nlt). Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man right...","summary_en":"NOAH 1. Son of Lamech and the grandson of Methuselah, a descendant of Seth, third son of Adam (Gn 5:3-20). Lamech named his son Noah, a name that sounds like a Hebrew term that can mean “relief” or “comfort.” When Lamech gave him this name, he said, “He will bring us relief from the painful labor of farming this ground that the Lord has cursed” (v 29, nlt). Determined to destroy creation because of rampant wickedness (cf. Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27), God made an exception with Noah, a man right...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60099,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Promised Land","title_en":"Promised Land","content_ro":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","summary_en":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87725,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Promised Land","title_en":"Promised Land","content_ro":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","summary_en":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115351,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Promised Land","title_en":"Promised Land","content_ro":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","summary_en":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142977,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Promised Land","title_en":"Promised Land","content_ro":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Promised Land<\/h3>\n<p>Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29).<\/p>\n<p>Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’s people (12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:7-21; 17:7-8). Later, after Israel was delivered from Egypt and was established as God’s people at Mount Sinai, they were given possession of the land promised to their fathers.<\/p>\n<p>Continued possession of the land depended on obedience. If Israel violated the covenant, they would experience the covenant’s curses, the most severe of which is exile from the Promised Land (Lev 26:32-33). Eventually, that is what happened: Israel’s persistent rebellion against the Lord resulted in their exile to Assyria and Babylon, the loss of the land, and the destruction of the Temple (2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21). But God also promises that when the people repent, “then I will remember my covenant with Jacob . . . and I will remember the land” (Lev 26:42). During the Exile, Jeremiah and other prophets looked beyond the Exile to a future restoration and return to the land (Jer 32:36-44), which occurred during the reign of Cyrus the Great of Persia (see Ezra; Nehemiah).<\/p>\n<p>The promises for the land await ultimate fulfillment. God’s purpose is to prepare an eternal homeland for his people, where the rule of the divine King is direct and just, where all things are subject to his will, where death and sin are abolished, and where the needs of his people are completely satisfied (Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:28-30; 3:15-19; 4:3-16; 12:1-3, 7; 13:14-18; 15:1-21; 17:7-8; Exod 6:1-13; Lev 26:1-46; 1 Kgs 8:22-53; 9:1-9; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; 25:1-21; Jer 32:36-44; Heb 11:13-16; Rev 21:1-27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","summary_en":"Promised Land Men and women were given the task of governing the earth and ruling over the creation, both to satisfy their own needs and to bring glory to the Creator (Gen 1:28-30). But when humanity fell into sin, they suffered alienation not only from God and their fellow human beings but also from the land on which they lived (3:17-19; see 4:3-16; cp. 5:29). Then God called Abram to follow him by faith and to receive Canaan as a special homeland, a promised land for his descendants as God’...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":15111,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ham (Person)","title_en":"Ham (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>HAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Second son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 22; 10:1, 6, 20). Ham had four sons whose names were Cush, Mizraim (Hebrew for Egypt), Put, and Canaan (Gn 10:6; 1 Chr 1:8). Ham, then, is seen as the ancestor of the Egyptians (though a mixed race apparently occurs later), as well as of peoples in Africa, Arabia, and Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>After the Flood, Noah began cultivating vineyards, and on one occasion exposed himself while drunk (Gn 9:20-24). Ham saw his father lying naked and related the incident to Shem and Japheth, who covered Noah up discreetly. When Noah awoke and learned what “his youngest son” (seen by some as Ham) had done, he cursed Ham’s son Canaan, saying his brothers (Cush, Mizraim, and Put) and Shem and Japheth would rule over him. But if Ham is the one referred to in 9:24 as offending Noah, why should the curse fall on his son Canaan? The most likely answer is that Ham is not being referred to in verse 24. The expression is “his youngest son” (the “younger” of the <span>kjv<\/span> is hardly possible in Hebrew), whereas Ham is repeatedly seen as the second of the brothers, not the youngest (5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18; 10:1), the explicit order of the sons indicating age. Instead, “his youngest son” refers to Canaan, and to some base deed not being recorded, on whom the curse falls. “Son” used for “grandson” is common Semitic material, and it seems to have been used here in this way since Canaan is the “youngest” of the (grand)sons. The curse, then, as the text clearly says, is on Canaan rather than Ham. Canaan (and his posterity) is to be subjugated by Japheth and Shem with the Canaanites, finally disappearing by NT times.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Second son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 22; 10:1, 6, 20). Ham had four sons whose names were Cush, Mizraim (Hebrew for Egypt), Put, and Canaan (Gn 10:6; 1 Chr 1:8). Ham, then, is seen as the ancestor of the Egyptians (though a mixed race apparently occurs later), as well as of peoples in Africa, Arabia, and Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>After the Flood, Noah began cultivating vineyards, and on one occasion exposed himself while drunk (Gn 9:20-24). Ham saw his father lying naked and related the incident to Shem and Japheth, who covered Noah up discreetly. When Noah awoke and learned what “his youngest son” (seen by some as Ham) had done, he cursed Ham’s son Canaan, saying his brothers (Cush, Mizraim, and Put) and Shem and Japheth would rule over him. But if Ham is the one referred to in 9:24 as offending Noah, why should the curse fall on his son Canaan? The most likely answer is that Ham is not being referred to in verse 24. The expression is “his youngest son” (the “younger” of the <span>kjv<\/span> is hardly possible in Hebrew), whereas Ham is repeatedly seen as the second of the brothers, not the youngest (5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18; 10:1), the explicit order of the sons indicating age. Instead, “his youngest son” refers to Canaan, and to some base deed not being recorded, on whom the curse falls. “Son” used for “grandson” is common Semitic material, and it seems to have been used here in this way since Canaan is the “youngest” of the (grand)sons. The curse, then, as the text clearly says, is on Canaan rather than Ham. Canaan (and his posterity) is to be subjugated by Japheth and Shem with the Canaanites, finally disappearing by NT times.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HAM (Person) Second son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 22; 10:1, 6, 20). Ham had four sons whose names were Cush, Mizraim (Hebrew for Egypt), Put, and Canaan (Gn 10:6; 1 Chr 1:8). Ham, then, is seen as the ancestor of the Egyptians (though a mixed race apparently occurs later), as well as of peoples in Africa, Arabia, and Canaan. After the Flood, Noah began cultivating vineyards, and on one occasion exposed himself while drunk (Gn 9:20-24). Ham saw his father lying naked and related the ...","summary_en":"HAM (Person) Second son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 22; 10:1, 6, 20). Ham had four sons whose names were Cush, Mizraim (Hebrew for Egypt), Put, and Canaan (Gn 10:6; 1 Chr 1:8). Ham, then, is seen as the ancestor of the Egyptians (though a mixed race apparently occurs later), as well as of peoples in Africa, Arabia, and Canaan. After the Flood, Noah began cultivating vineyards, and on one occasion exposed himself while drunk (Gn 9:20-24). Ham saw his father lying naked and related the ...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18500,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Japheth","title_en":"Japheth","content_ro":"<h3>JAPHETH<\/h3>\n<p>One of Noah’s three sons (Gn 5:32; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 27; 10:1-5; 1 Chr 1:4-5) who, along with his wife, was among the eight human survivors of the great Flood. Because Japheth and his brother Shem acted with respect and modesty in covering their father’s nakedness while he was in a drunken condition (Gn 9:20-23), they were both blessed in Noah’s prophetic pronouncement of Genesis 9:26-27. Of Japheth, Noah said, “God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his slave” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There are two interpretations of the meaning of this prophecy. Some understand the enlargement of Japheth to be a reference to a great increase in numbers of descendants. “To dwell in the tents of Shem” is understood as Japheth’s sharing in the blessing of Shem. According to this view, there is to be a time when God will work primarily with Shem (the people of Israel), but then, at a later time, Japheth will be brought into connection with the faith of Israel and share in its promises. In this view fulfillment is found in the opening of the gospel to the Gentiles at the inception of the NT church. Others understand the “enlargement of Japheth” to refer to territorial enlargement, and the “dwelling in the tents of Shem” as the conquest of Shemite territory by Japhethites. In this view, fulfillment is found in the Greek and Roman conquests of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” in Genesis 10:2, Japheth is listed as the father of Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. These are the ancestors of peoples who lived to the north and west of Israel and who spoke what today are classified as Indo-European languages.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JAPHETH<\/h3>\n<p>One of Noah’s three sons (Gn 5:32; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 27; 10:1-5; 1 Chr 1:4-5) who, along with his wife, was among the eight human survivors of the great Flood. Because Japheth and his brother Shem acted with respect and modesty in covering their father’s nakedness while he was in a drunken condition (Gn 9:20-23), they were both blessed in Noah’s prophetic pronouncement of Genesis 9:26-27. Of Japheth, Noah said, “God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his slave” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There are two interpretations of the meaning of this prophecy. Some understand the enlargement of Japheth to be a reference to a great increase in numbers of descendants. “To dwell in the tents of Shem” is understood as Japheth’s sharing in the blessing of Shem. According to this view, there is to be a time when God will work primarily with Shem (the people of Israel), but then, at a later time, Japheth will be brought into connection with the faith of Israel and share in its promises. In this view fulfillment is found in the opening of the gospel to the Gentiles at the inception of the NT church. Others understand the “enlargement of Japheth” to refer to territorial enlargement, and the “dwelling in the tents of Shem” as the conquest of Shemite territory by Japhethites. In this view, fulfillment is found in the Greek and Roman conquests of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” in Genesis 10:2, Japheth is listed as the father of Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. These are the ancestors of peoples who lived to the north and west of Israel and who spoke what today are classified as Indo-European languages.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JAPHETH One of Noah’s three sons (Gn 5:32; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 27; 10:1-5; 1 Chr 1:4-5) who, along with his wife, was among the eight human survivors of the great Flood. Because Japheth and his brother Shem acted with respect and modesty in covering their father’s nakedness while he was in a drunken condition (Gn 9:20-23), they were both blessed in Noah’s prophetic pronouncement of Genesis 9:26-27. Of Japheth, Noah said, “God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan...","summary_en":"JAPHETH One of Noah’s three sons (Gn 5:32; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 27; 10:1-5; 1 Chr 1:4-5) who, along with his wife, was among the eight human survivors of the great Flood. Because Japheth and his brother Shem acted with respect and modesty in covering their father’s nakedness while he was in a drunken condition (Gn 9:20-23), they were both blessed in Noah’s prophetic pronouncement of Genesis 9:26-27. Of Japheth, Noah said, “God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34855,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shem","title_en":"Shem","content_ro":"<h3>SHEM<\/h3>\n<p>Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great.<\/p>\n<p>After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this act, Noah later pronounced a curse on Canaan, the son of Ham, and a blessing on both Shem and Japheth.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 11:10-27, the line of descent for the promised seed, which was to crush Satan (Gn 3:15; 5:1-32), is traced through Shem to Abraham, and ultimately through Judah and David to Christ (cf. Lk 3:36). The blessing of Noah on Shem is thus to be taken as an indication that the line of Shem will be the line through which the seed of Genesis 3:15 will come. This is the first time in the Bible that God is called the God of some particular individual or group of people. The statement that Canaan would be a servant to Shem was fulfilled centuries later when the Israelites, who descended from Shem, entered the land of Canaan and subdued the inhabitants of the land (cf. 1 Kgs 9:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Noah also said that Japheth would be enlarged and dwell in the tents of Shem (Gn 9:27), the latter of which would seem to imply sustenance and protection. After Japheth would be greatly increased in numbers, the Japhethites would be brought into contact with Shem and would share in the blessings and promises of the Semitic faith. Many scholars see fulfillment of this prophecy in the opening of the gospel to the Gentiles during the NT era of the establishment of the church.<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” recorded in Genesis 10, five descendants of Shem are mentioned (Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram). Receiving particular emphasis among these descendants is Eber from the line of Arphaxad, whose line is traced to Abraham in Genesis 11:16-27.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEM<\/h3>\n<p>Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great.<\/p>\n<p>After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this act, Noah later pronounced a curse on Canaan, the son of Ham, and a blessing on both Shem and Japheth.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 11:10-27, the line of descent for the promised seed, which was to crush Satan (Gn 3:15; 5:1-32), is traced through Shem to Abraham, and ultimately through Judah and David to Christ (cf. Lk 3:36). The blessing of Noah on Shem is thus to be taken as an indication that the line of Shem will be the line through which the seed of Genesis 3:15 will come. This is the first time in the Bible that God is called the God of some particular individual or group of people. The statement that Canaan would be a servant to Shem was fulfilled centuries later when the Israelites, who descended from Shem, entered the land of Canaan and subdued the inhabitants of the land (cf. 1 Kgs 9:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Noah also said that Japheth would be enlarged and dwell in the tents of Shem (Gn 9:27), the latter of which would seem to imply sustenance and protection. After Japheth would be greatly increased in numbers, the Japhethites would be brought into contact with Shem and would share in the blessings and promises of the Semitic faith. Many scholars see fulfillment of this prophecy in the opening of the gospel to the Gentiles during the NT era of the establishment of the church.<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” recorded in Genesis 10, five descendants of Shem are mentioned (Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram). Receiving particular emphasis among these descendants is Eber from the line of Arphaxad, whose line is traced to Abraham in Genesis 11:16-27.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Nations; Noah #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEM Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great. After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this ...","summary_en":"SHEM Eldest son of Noah (Gn 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18, 23, 26-27; 11:10; 1 Chr 1:4, 17-27; Lk 3:36) and the ancestor of the Semitic peoples (Gn 10:1, 21-31). Shem lived 600 years (11:10-11). In Hebrew, Shem means “name,” perhaps implying that Noah expected this son’s name to become great. After their deliverance from the great Flood, Shem and Japheth acted with respect and dignity toward their drunken father Noah on an occasion when their brother Ham dishonored him (Gn 9:20-29). Because of this ...","source":"Articles\/S.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.
Geneza 5
— 32 versete
Geneza 5
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse